Re: OLE Discussion (was Re: Opendoc)
- From: Owen Taylor <otaylor gtk org>
- To: Miguel de Icaza <miguel nuclecu unam mx>
- Cc: ser perio unlp edu ar, gnome-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: OLE Discussion (was Re: Opendoc)
- Date: 19 May 1998 15:26:24 -0400
Miguel de Icaza <email@example.com> writes:
> > If you want this, then why not use OpenDoc that is based in Corba,
> > and not OLE2 that is based in COM.
> Because documentation for OLE2 is widely available; Because OLE2
> seemed simpler to me; Because we are going to grab the best ideas from
> both systems; because COM does not mean "evil"; Because OLE2 can be
> implemented in top of CORBA with minimal changes.
(BTW - Complete documentation for OpenDoc is available from IBM's
> Oh, btw, what makes COM "proprietary"?
- It is defined by a single vendor
- It is implemented by a single vendor
An object model based on OLE2 but using CORBA is a reasonable
thing to consider. IMO, OLE2/COM would not be.
(For one thing, the only implemention I know of of DCOM for Unix is
Software AG's EntireX port which uses all sorts of Win32 emulated
API's, has who knows what license, etc.)
] [Thread Prev