[Desktop_architects] [Announce] "Common Desktop Infrastructure" 0.1.0 is released

[Daisuke Kameda]

Daisuke Kameda is wrote:
> Kay Ramme is wrote:
>> Actually, OpenOffice.org's component model (Uno) was originally
>> envisioned to be exactly this, using so called "bridges" to mediate
>> between different languages, component models and protocols. This has
>> been achieved to some extent, e.g. there are bridges for Uno/RPC,
>> Java, OOo BASIC, Windows COM, C, various C++ ABIs, CLI (.Net),
>> Python and even experimental ones for Perl, TCL and XPCOM (there even
>> was a very experimental one for web services :-). That actually means,
>> that you could use Windows VBA on a Windows box to call on XPCOM
>> objects being instantiated on a Linux system.
> 
> I know almost about this, because we had researched about various
> component technologies :-)
> 
> Perhaps you know this, if I add explanation, our idea differ from
> "bridge" model. We intend to introduce the new low level
> component/protocol model, and introduce "protocol converter"
> (nearly equal "bridge") for mutual converting the new model
> and existing technologies

What do you think better solution for realizing interoperability?


>> Unfortunately there is not only a lack of an "interoperable ABI" (the
>> mediator between the programs component models), but also a lack of
>> "shared" interfaces. It is quite unlikely, that you find any
>> reasonableUno object in OOo which may be syntactically compatible
>>  (has a compatible interface) to be passed e.g. to an XPCOM object,
>> and even if there is a syntactically compatible one, than it is likely
>> semantically incompatible.
> 
> We intend to introduce abstract components as "shared" interface.
> I think that it is the best solution, now.

I think that it is possible to define "share" interface like ODF.
Do you think that it is possible?


>> This does not mean, that the interoperability problem is unsolvable,
>> it is "just" a huge amount of work.
> 
> Yes. It is very, very huge work.
> But, I think that it is necessary for opensource desktop.

I think that it is better to practice these "a huge amount of work"
in Potland project.

If you agree that these works is necessary, what do you think to
perform it better?

-- 
Daisuke Kameda
   Japan KDE Users' Group:  President
     mailto:daisuke at kde.gr.jp  http://www.kde.gr.jp/~daisuke/
   immodule for Qt Project:  Project Maintainer
     http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software_2fimmodule_2dqt
   SMG Co., Ltd.:  Engineering Creator
     mailto:kameda at smg.co.jp  http://www.smg.co.jp/
     http://www.smg.co.jp/opensource/CommonDesktopInfrastructure/