Menu
▾
▴
svgdomcsharp-developers — Developers
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
(40) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2006 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
| 2007 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
(21) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Don X. <do...@ho...> - 2002-02-18 00:10:51
|
Stefan is having problems emailing the list from his provider. I'm forwarding this for him. >From: "Goessner / MecXpert" <goe...@me...> >To: "Don XML" <do...@ho...>, ><svg...@li...> >Subject: some points .. >Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 00:28:51 +0100 > >hi, > >.. sorry, i can read all mails (twice:-), but seem to have problems >replying >.. > >1) i would also prefer the .net naming conventions. >a) Pascal-casing for namespaces, classes, structs, delegates, enums .. i.e. >'Svg', 'Xml', 'Uri' ? >b) Camel-casing for variables ? >c) member variables with or without leading 'm_' ? > >2) lists, arrays .. i would prefer to also implementer indexers parallel to >'item', 'getItem' methods. > >3) properties instead of getters and setters .. yes absolutely. > >4) i would also vote for introducing enums instead of java constants. > >5) i don't know java very well, but i know that events are implemented >totally different. should we use delegates? i vote for those. > >6) maybe the NDOC documentation tool would help .. >http://ndoc.sourceforge.net/ > >8) i also recommend lutz roeders .net reflector .. >http://www.aisto.com/roeder/dotnet/ > >9) i would like to start with the interfaces in chapter 7 of the spec >'Coordinate Systems, Transformations and Units' and the implementations of >the underlying classes. > >10) exceptions .. if we have to decide from which to derive .. as a rule of >thumb, we should use the most lowerlevel class/interface until there is a >good reason to derive from a higherlevel class/interface. > >11) i would vote for also to support project makefiles .. i am quite >puristic and still working with the command line window. > >12) i work with the simple but good EditPlus editor, but have installed >SharpDevelop also. i will migrate, if we decide for it. >-- >stefan > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. |
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 23:14:28
|
good idea. -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of Kurt Cagle Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 5:06 PM To: svg...@li... Subject: Re: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions Also, I think we should get into the habit of including in the interfaces versioning and authoring information - who did what when. I know this is partially covered under the SourceForge CVS, but it makes it easier to follow if I'm looking at a local version of the interfaces. -- Kurt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> To: <svg...@li...> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 2:48 PM Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > I've done the w3c\dom\events collection of files. > > I went ahead with the change to DOMException and made EventExcpetion inherit > from that. If we decide not to go that route I will roll that back. > > Also attached is the contents of the w3c\dom\svg directory. Since I changed > interface names in events to include the "I", I have also updated all > references to those types in the w3c\dom\svg set of classes. > > Since the w3c\dom\svg is the fulcrum upon which all of the other naming > changes will pivot, we'll probably need to be kind of careful with that set > of files. Renaming all Event interface type references is the only change I > made to w3c\dom\svg. > > Also should we also rename interface file names to include the "I"; e.g > change Event.cs to IEvent.cs? > > don kackman > > PS Don, you're right. This is fun! > > -----Original Message----- > From: svg...@li... > [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of > Don XML > Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 4:29 PM > To: svg...@li... > Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > > Yeah, I ran into the same problem with the replies. As for DOM Core, just > the stuff in the W3C/DOM. > > DX > > > >From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> > >To: svg...@li... > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:59:41 -0600 > > > >Don, > > > >When you say DOM core which set of class do you mean? > > > >Are you doing w3c\dom\svg or the whole w3c\dom or just the set directly in > >w3c\dom? > > > >I'll start on w3c\dom\events if noone else has got it. > > > >don kackman > > > >PS Just in case noone has noticed yet you need to use "reply to all" when > >replyng to this group. Otherwise it just goes to the author which is a > >mistake I've made a couple of times now, being used to the Yahoo Group > >messages which reply to the group address. > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: svg...@li... > >[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of > >Don XML > >Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 12:14 PM > >To: svg...@li... > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > > > > >Cool! Andrew is doing the CSS and I'll do the DOM core. I totally agree > >with the other points. In comparing the W3C IDL to the Java, it looks like > >they made some changes when implementing it in Java, so I can't see why we > >couldn't do the same. And while we are at it, since C# was submitted to > >EMCA as a standard, we should send the C# bindings to the W3C. > > > >DX > > > > > > >From: AW...@UR... > > >To: svg...@li... > > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 12:12:25 -0500 > > > > > > > > >I think the c# style is the way to go. > > > > > >I made most of changes to the w3c\css\**.cs files (still a work in > > >progress...). > > > > > >What about removing/changing fields to enums e.g. LexicalUnit_Fields.cs?? > > >Don't the underscores need to go? > > > > > > > > >Andrew > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list > >Svg...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list > >Svg...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > http://www.hotmail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list > Svg...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |
|
From: Kurt C. <ku...@ku...> - 2002-02-17 23:04:27
|
Also, I think we should get into the habit of including in the interfaces versioning and authoring information - who did what when. I know this is partially covered under the SourceForge CVS, but it makes it easier to follow if I'm looking at a local version of the interfaces. -- Kurt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> To: <svg...@li...> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 2:48 PM Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > I've done the w3c\dom\events collection of files. > > I went ahead with the change to DOMException and made EventExcpetion inherit > from that. If we decide not to go that route I will roll that back. > > Also attached is the contents of the w3c\dom\svg directory. Since I changed > interface names in events to include the "I", I have also updated all > references to those types in the w3c\dom\svg set of classes. > > Since the w3c\dom\svg is the fulcrum upon which all of the other naming > changes will pivot, we'll probably need to be kind of careful with that set > of files. Renaming all Event interface type references is the only change I > made to w3c\dom\svg. > > Also should we also rename interface file names to include the "I"; e.g > change Event.cs to IEvent.cs? > > don kackman > > PS Don, you're right. This is fun! > > -----Original Message----- > From: svg...@li... > [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of > Don XML > Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 4:29 PM > To: svg...@li... > Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > > Yeah, I ran into the same problem with the replies. As for DOM Core, just > the stuff in the W3C/DOM. > > DX > > > >From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> > >To: svg...@li... > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:59:41 -0600 > > > >Don, > > > >When you say DOM core which set of class do you mean? > > > >Are you doing w3c\dom\svg or the whole w3c\dom or just the set directly in > >w3c\dom? > > > >I'll start on w3c\dom\events if noone else has got it. > > > >don kackman > > > >PS Just in case noone has noticed yet you need to use "reply to all" when > >replyng to this group. Otherwise it just goes to the author which is a > >mistake I've made a couple of times now, being used to the Yahoo Group > >messages which reply to the group address. > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: svg...@li... > >[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of > >Don XML > >Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 12:14 PM > >To: svg...@li... > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > > > > >Cool! Andrew is doing the CSS and I'll do the DOM core. I totally agree > >with the other points. In comparing the W3C IDL to the Java, it looks like > >they made some changes when implementing it in Java, so I can't see why we > >couldn't do the same. And while we are at it, since C# was submitted to > >EMCA as a standard, we should send the C# bindings to the W3C. > > > >DX > > > > > > >From: AW...@UR... > > >To: svg...@li... > > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 12:12:25 -0500 > > > > > > > > >I think the c# style is the way to go. > > > > > >I made most of changes to the w3c\css\**.cs files (still a work in > > >progress...). > > > > > >What about removing/changing fields to enums e.g. LexicalUnit_Fields.cs?? > > >Don't the underscores need to go? > > > > > > > > >Andrew > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list > >Svg...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list > >Svg...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > http://www.hotmail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list > Svg...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > |
|
From: Don X. <do...@ho...> - 2002-02-17 23:02:51
|
>From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> >PS Don, you're right. This is fun! As long as we are learning and working together this will stay fun. We also need to remember to get away from the computer and interact with other humans once in a while. For me, it's cold outside (I'm in northern New Jersey), there's no NHL, just Olympic Hockey (not bad, but the good games are later this week), and I have a rare Sunday without stuff to do with the wife and kids. DX _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com |
|
From: Kurt C. <ku...@ku...> - 2002-02-17 23:00:49
|
Not meaning to disrupt the activities here, but I have a question that one of you may be able to help me with. I'm trying to instantiate an ActiveXObject within a script in SVG, and the engine isn't letting me do it. Has anyone run into this particular problem, and if so, how to fix it? -- Kurt |
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 22:48:26
|
I've done the w3c\dom\events collection of files. I went ahead with the change to DOMException and made EventExcpetion inherit from that. If we decide not to go that route I will roll that back. Also attached is the contents of the w3c\dom\svg directory. Since I changed interface names in events to include the "I", I have also updated all references to those types in the w3c\dom\svg set of classes. Since the w3c\dom\svg is the fulcrum upon which all of the other naming changes will pivot, we'll probably need to be kind of careful with that set of files. Renaming all Event interface type references is the only change I made to w3c\dom\svg. Also should we also rename interface file names to include the "I"; e.g change Event.cs to IEvent.cs? don kackman PS Don, you're right. This is fun! -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of Don XML Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 4:29 PM To: svg...@li... Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions Yeah, I ran into the same problem with the replies. As for DOM Core, just the stuff in the W3C/DOM. DX >From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> >To: svg...@li... >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:59:41 -0600 > >Don, > >When you say DOM core which set of class do you mean? > >Are you doing w3c\dom\svg or the whole w3c\dom or just the set directly in >w3c\dom? > >I'll start on w3c\dom\events if noone else has got it. > >don kackman > >PS Just in case noone has noticed yet you need to use "reply to all" when >replyng to this group. Otherwise it just goes to the author which is a >mistake I've made a couple of times now, being used to the Yahoo Group >messages which reply to the group address. > >-----Original Message----- >From: svg...@li... >[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of >Don XML >Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 12:14 PM >To: svg...@li... >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > >Cool! Andrew is doing the CSS and I'll do the DOM core. I totally agree >with the other points. In comparing the W3C IDL to the Java, it looks like >they made some changes when implementing it in Java, so I can't see why we >couldn't do the same. And while we are at it, since C# was submitted to >EMCA as a standard, we should send the C# bindings to the W3C. > >DX > > > >From: AW...@UR... > >To: svg...@li... > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 12:12:25 -0500 > > > > > >I think the c# style is the way to go. > > > >I made most of changes to the w3c\css\**.cs files (still a work in > >progress...). > > > >What about removing/changing fields to enums e.g. LexicalUnit_Fields.cs?? > >Don't the underscores need to go? > > > > > >Andrew > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > > >_______________________________________________ >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list >Svg...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > > >_______________________________________________ >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list >Svg...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers _________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |
|
From: Don X. <do...@ho...> - 2002-02-17 22:40:58
|
Your suggestions are along the same lines as I was thinking. The only other
thing I was going to do was to build the DOMException in Visio UML (they
have an Exception signal) and then take a look at the generated code. I
figure it will look like your bullet number 2.
As for the Visio Viewer problem, It probably doesn't work with the VS Arch
version, or maybe the UML. There is a save as Web feature, but since I
don't have any drawings (just the UML) it doesn't help much.
DX
>From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...>
>To: svg...@li...
>Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] More Conversion conventions
>Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 15:49:50 -0600
>
>Here's what I propose:
>
>1) All SVG exceptions inherit from DOMException.
>2) DOMException inherits from ApplicationExpsetion and adds the error code
>field
>3) All exceptions that inherit from DOMException implement at a minimum the
>following constructors:
> public EventException(short code) : base( code )
> {
>
> }
>
> public EventException(short code, string message) : base( code, message )
> {
>
> }
>
> public EventException(short code, string message, Exception
>innerException)
>: base( code, message, innerException )
> {
>
> }
>
>I have attached a rewrite of DOMException and EventException following this
>proposal.
>
>Comments?
>
>don kackman
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
|
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 22:37:45
|
Sounds good. If nobody has a problem with what I did with DOMException please include the change from my previous post. I have attached a very quickly compiled coding conventions document (attached). This is just meant to organize some of the decisions we are making on this list so we have them all written down. don kackman PS Is SharpVectors all one word or two? -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of Don XML Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 4:29 PM To: svg...@li... Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions Yeah, I ran into the same problem with the replies. As for DOM Core, just the stuff in the W3C/DOM. DX >From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> >To: svg...@li... >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:59:41 -0600 > >Don, > >When you say DOM core which set of class do you mean? > >Are you doing w3c\dom\svg or the whole w3c\dom or just the set directly in >w3c\dom? > >I'll start on w3c\dom\events if noone else has got it. > >don kackman > >PS Just in case noone has noticed yet you need to use "reply to all" when >replyng to this group. Otherwise it just goes to the author which is a >mistake I've made a couple of times now, being used to the Yahoo Group >messages which reply to the group address. > >-----Original Message----- >From: svg...@li... >[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of >Don XML >Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 12:14 PM >To: svg...@li... >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > >Cool! Andrew is doing the CSS and I'll do the DOM core. I totally agree >with the other points. In comparing the W3C IDL to the Java, it looks like >they made some changes when implementing it in Java, so I can't see why we >couldn't do the same. And while we are at it, since C# was submitted to >EMCA as a standard, we should send the C# bindings to the W3C. > >DX > > > >From: AW...@UR... > >To: svg...@li... > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 12:12:25 -0500 > > > > > >I think the c# style is the way to go. > > > >I made most of changes to the w3c\css\**.cs files (still a work in > >progress...). > > > >What about removing/changing fields to enums e.g. LexicalUnit_Fields.cs?? > >Don't the underscores need to go? > > > > > >Andrew > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > > >_______________________________________________ >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list >Svg...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > > >_______________________________________________ >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list >Svg...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers _________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |
|
From: Don X. <do...@ho...> - 2002-02-17 22:28:56
|
Yeah, I ran into the same problem with the replies. As for DOM Core, just the stuff in the W3C/DOM. DX >From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> >To: svg...@li... >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:59:41 -0600 > >Don, > >When you say DOM core which set of class do you mean? > >Are you doing w3c\dom\svg or the whole w3c\dom or just the set directly in >w3c\dom? > >I'll start on w3c\dom\events if noone else has got it. > >don kackman > >PS Just in case noone has noticed yet you need to use "reply to all" when >replyng to this group. Otherwise it just goes to the author which is a >mistake I've made a couple of times now, being used to the Yahoo Group >messages which reply to the group address. > >-----Original Message----- >From: svg...@li... >[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of >Don XML >Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 12:14 PM >To: svg...@li... >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > > >Cool! Andrew is doing the CSS and I'll do the DOM core. I totally agree >with the other points. In comparing the W3C IDL to the Java, it looks like >they made some changes when implementing it in Java, so I can't see why we >couldn't do the same. And while we are at it, since C# was submitted to >EMCA as a standard, we should send the C# bindings to the W3C. > >DX > > > >From: AW...@UR... > >To: svg...@li... > >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions > >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 12:12:25 -0500 > > > > > >I think the c# style is the way to go. > > > >I made most of changes to the w3c\css\**.cs files (still a work in > >progress...). > > > >What about removing/changing fields to enums e.g. LexicalUnit_Fields.cs?? > >Don't the underscores need to go? > > > > > >Andrew > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > > >_______________________________________________ >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list >Svg...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers > > >_______________________________________________ >Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list >Svg...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers _________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com |
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 21:49:52
|
Here's what I propose:
1) All SVG exceptions inherit from DOMException.
2) DOMException inherits from ApplicationExpsetion and adds the error code
field
3) All exceptions that inherit from DOMException implement at a minimum the
following constructors:
public EventException(short code) : base( code )
{
}
public EventException(short code, string message) : base( code, message )
{
}
public EventException(short code, string message, Exception innerException)
: base( code, message, innerException )
{
}
I have attached a rewrite of DOMException and EventException following this
proposal.
Comments?
don kackman
-----Original Message-----
From: svg...@li...
[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of
AW...@UR...
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 3:41 PM
To: do...@it...;
svg...@li...
Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] More Conversion conventions
1) Application Exception. Two categories of exceptions exist under the base
class Exception:
- The pre-defined common language runtime exception classes derived from
SystemException.
- The user-defined application exception classes derived from
ApplicationException.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpref/html/
frlrfSystemTypeClassGetFieldTopic2.asp
2) I was wondering that myself. CssException.cs is more like the .net
exceptions because it has several functionally similar constructors. Should
we extend the w3c exception classes or inherit from application.exception? I
prefer inheriting from System.ApplicationException.
-----Original Message-----
From: Donald Kackman
To: svg...@li...
Sent: 2/17/2002 4:07 PM
Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] More Conversion conventions
How should we handle translating excpetion classes?
Take a look at
// Static Model
namespace SharpVectors.w3c.dom
{
using System;
public class DOMException : SystemException
{
public short code;
public const short INDEX_SIZE_ERR = 1;
//some constants deleted for brevity in this email
public const short INVALID_ACCESS_ERR = 15;
public DOMException(short code,
string message)
{
}
}// END CLASS DEFINITION DOMException
} // SharpVectors.w3c.dom
Also
1) Should Sharp Vector exception inherit from SystemException or
ApplicationException.
2) In instances like this should we extend the w3c set of contructors.
In
general a C# exception should have the following three constructors
public exc();
public exc( string message );
public exc( string message, Exception innerException );
don kackman
_______________________________________________
Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list
Svg...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers
_______________________________________________
Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list
Svg...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers
|
|
From: <AW...@UR...> - 2002-02-17 21:39:34
|
1) Application Exception. Two categories of exceptions exist under the base class Exception: - The pre-defined common language runtime exception classes derived from SystemException. - The user-defined application exception classes derived from ApplicationException. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpref/html/ frlrfSystemTypeClassGetFieldTopic2.asp 2) I was wondering that myself. CssException.cs is more like the .net exceptions because it has several functionally similar constructors. Should we extend the w3c exception classes or inherit from application.exception? I prefer inheriting from System.ApplicationException. -----Original Message----- From: Donald Kackman To: svg...@li... Sent: 2/17/2002 4:07 PM Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] More Conversion conventions How should we handle translating excpetion classes? Take a look at // Static Model namespace SharpVectors.w3c.dom { using System; public class DOMException : SystemException { public short code; public const short INDEX_SIZE_ERR = 1; //some constants deleted for brevity in this email public const short INVALID_ACCESS_ERR = 15; public DOMException(short code, string message) { } }// END CLASS DEFINITION DOMException } // SharpVectors.w3c.dom Also 1) Should Sharp Vector exception inherit from SystemException or ApplicationException. 2) In instances like this should we extend the w3c set of contructors. In general a C# exception should have the following three constructors public exc(); public exc( string message ); public exc( string message, Exception innerException ); don kackman _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 21:07:41
|
How should we handle translating excpetion classes?
Take a look at
// Static Model
namespace SharpVectors.w3c.dom
{
using System;
public class DOMException : SystemException
{
public short code;
public const short INDEX_SIZE_ERR = 1;
//some constants deleted for brevity in this email
public const short INVALID_ACCESS_ERR = 15;
public DOMException(short code,
string message)
{
}
}// END CLASS DEFINITION DOMException
} // SharpVectors.w3c.dom
Also
1) Should Sharp Vector exception inherit from SystemException or
ApplicationException.
2) In instances like this should we extend the w3c set of contructors. In
general a C# exception should have the following three constructors
public exc();
public exc( string message );
public exc( string message, Exception innerException );
don kackman
|
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 20:59:44
|
Don, When you say DOM core which set of class do you mean? Are you doing w3c\dom\svg or the whole w3c\dom or just the set directly in w3c\dom? I'll start on w3c\dom\events if noone else has got it. don kackman PS Just in case noone has noticed yet you need to use "reply to all" when replyng to this group. Otherwise it just goes to the author which is a mistake I've made a couple of times now, being used to the Yahoo Group messages which reply to the group address. -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of Don XML Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 12:14 PM To: svg...@li... Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions Cool! Andrew is doing the CSS and I'll do the DOM core. I totally agree with the other points. In comparing the W3C IDL to the Java, it looks like they made some changes when implementing it in Java, so I can't see why we couldn't do the same. And while we are at it, since C# was submitted to EMCA as a standard, we should send the C# bindings to the W3C. DX >From: AW...@UR... >To: svg...@li... >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 12:12:25 -0500 > > >I think the c# style is the way to go. > >I made most of changes to the w3c\css\**.cs files (still a work in >progress...). > >What about removing/changing fields to enums e.g. LexicalUnit_Fields.cs?? >Don't the underscores need to go? > > >Andrew > _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 20:53:33
|
Can't seem to get the viewer to work. I installed it but don't see it anywhere and can't open the VSD in IE. don kackman -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of Don XML Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 12:10 PM To: svg...@li... Subject: Re: FW: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] C# Source Code Don, Here's the link: http://office.microsoft.com/downloads/2002/VWC10.aspx I think we can keep this project IDE agnostic, or at the very least standardize on SharpDevelop. I just hadn't downloaded it yet, and the JUMP toolkit requires VS.Net, thus the VS.Net project. DX >From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> >To: svg...@li... >Subject: FW: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] C# Source Code >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 10:48:20 -0600 > >Don, > >Can you find a link for that Visio view. The texh preview I found doens't >seem to work that well. > >I have created a SharpDevelop project to go along with the VS project. > >don > >-----Original Message----- >From: svg...@li... >[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of >Don XML >Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 8:24 PM >To: svg...@li... >Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] C# Source Code > > > >Here's a zip file with the converted Batik interfaces (plus a couple >classes), along with the UML for Visio Arch (I think there is a free viewer >if you don't have Visio). I started to go thru the DOM interfaces and >compare them to the W3C. If anyone else wants to grab another section of >code and start fixing, go right ahead. I think we all agree the changing >the interfaces slightly to me .Net naming conventions is the "right" thing >to do. BTW, I found a Java binding example in the W3C Core DOM >documentation, and there are naming standard changes, so I guess it is >alright. > >DX > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ><< SharpVectors.cmbx >> ><< SharpVectors.prjx >> _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |
|
From: Don X. <do...@ho...> - 2002-02-17 18:13:51
|
Cool! Andrew is doing the CSS and I'll do the DOM core. I totally agree with the other points. In comparing the W3C IDL to the Java, it looks like they made some changes when implementing it in Java, so I can't see why we couldn't do the same. And while we are at it, since C# was submitted to EMCA as a standard, we should send the C# bindings to the W3C. DX >From: AW...@UR... >To: svg...@li... >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 12:12:25 -0500 > > >I think the c# style is the way to go. > >I made most of changes to the w3c\css\**.cs files (still a work in >progress...). > >What about removing/changing fields to enums e.g. LexicalUnit_Fields.cs?? >Don't the underscores need to go? > > >Andrew > _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com |
|
From: Don X. <do...@ho...> - 2002-02-17 18:10:34
|
Don, Here's the link: http://office.microsoft.com/downloads/2002/VWC10.aspx I think we can keep this project IDE agnostic, or at the very least standardize on SharpDevelop. I just hadn't downloaded it yet, and the JUMP toolkit requires VS.Net, thus the VS.Net project. DX >From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> >To: svg...@li... >Subject: FW: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] C# Source Code >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 10:48:20 -0600 > >Don, > >Can you find a link for that Visio view. The texh preview I found doens't >seem to work that well. > >I have created a SharpDevelop project to go along with the VS project. > >don > >-----Original Message----- >From: svg...@li... >[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of >Don XML >Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 8:24 PM >To: svg...@li... >Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] C# Source Code > > > >Here's a zip file with the converted Batik interfaces (plus a couple >classes), along with the UML for Visio Arch (I think there is a free viewer >if you don't have Visio). I started to go thru the DOM interfaces and >compare them to the W3C. If anyone else wants to grab another section of >code and start fixing, go right ahead. I think we all agree the changing >the interfaces slightly to me .Net naming conventions is the "right" thing >to do. BTW, I found a Java binding example in the W3C Core DOM >documentation, and there are naming standard changes, so I guess it is >alright. > >DX > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ><< SharpVectors.cmbx >> ><< SharpVectors.prjx >> _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. |
|
From: <AW...@UR...> - 2002-02-17 17:10:29
|
I think the c# style is the way to go.
I made most of changes to the w3c\css\**.cs files (still a work in
progress...).
What about removing/changing fields to enums e.g. LexicalUnit_Fields.cs??
Don't the underscores need to go?
Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: Donald Kackman
To: svg...@li...
Sent: 2/17/2002 11:55 AM
Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Conversion conventions
Now that it sounds like we're all in agreement about using .NET naming
conventions I think we need to create some guidelines for how exactly to
convert the Java interface syntax to C#.
As Don already mentioned prepending a capital "I" to each interface
would be
the first step.
My main question is what do we do with Java getter and setter methods?
Since
Java doesn't have C#'s property syntax they use a lot of getProperty and
setProperty(value) methods.
Namely should this member:
string getNamespaceURI();
be left as is or converted to this:
string NamespaceURI { get; }
This goes a little beyond mere naming issues as C# properties slightly
change the smemantics of property accessors.
I would vote we switch to the C# style as it will again feel more
natural to
.NET programmers.
Do we need a guidelines document for this project? Both to inform those
of
use who will be doing the conversion and those who will eventually be
consuming the library and will need to know how exactly our stuff
compares
to the w3c defined stuff.
don kackman
-----Original Message-----
From: svg...@li...
[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of
Don XML
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 8:24 PM
To: svg...@li...
Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] C# Source Code
Here's a zip file with the converted Batik interfaces (plus a couple
classes), along with the UML for Visio Arch (I think there is a free
viewer
if you don't have Visio). I started to go thru the DOM interfaces and
compare them to the W3C. If anyone else wants to grab another section
of
code and start fixing, go right ahead. I think we all agree the
changing
the interfaces slightly to me .Net naming conventions is the "right"
thing
to do. BTW, I found a Java binding example in the W3C Core DOM
documentation, and there are naming standard changes, so I guess it is
alright.
DX
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
_______________________________________________
Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list
Svg...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers
|
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 16:55:45
|
Now that it sounds like we're all in agreement about using .NET naming
conventions I think we need to create some guidelines for how exactly to
convert the Java interface syntax to C#.
As Don already mentioned prepending a capital "I" to each interface would be
the first step.
My main question is what do we do with Java getter and setter methods? Since
Java doesn't have C#'s property syntax they use a lot of getProperty and
setProperty(value) methods.
Namely should this member:
string getNamespaceURI();
be left as is or converted to this:
string NamespaceURI { get; }
This goes a little beyond mere naming issues as C# properties slightly
change the smemantics of property accessors.
I would vote we switch to the C# style as it will again feel more natural to
.NET programmers.
Do we need a guidelines document for this project? Both to inform those of
use who will be doing the conversion and those who will eventually be
consuming the library and will need to know how exactly our stuff compares
to the w3c defined stuff.
don kackman
-----Original Message-----
From: svg...@li...
[mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of
Don XML
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 8:24 PM
To: svg...@li...
Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] C# Source Code
Here's a zip file with the converted Batik interfaces (plus a couple
classes), along with the UML for Visio Arch (I think there is a free viewer
if you don't have Visio). I started to go thru the DOM interfaces and
compare them to the W3C. If anyone else wants to grab another section of
code and start fixing, go right ahead. I think we all agree the changing
the interfaces slightly to me .Net naming conventions is the "right" thing
to do. BTW, I found a Java binding example in the W3C Core DOM
documentation, and there are naming standard changes, so I guess it is
alright.
DX
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
|
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 16:48:25
|
Don, Can you find a link for that Visio view. The texh preview I found doens't seem to work that well. I have created a SharpDevelop project to go along with the VS project. don -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of Don XML Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 8:24 PM To: svg...@li... Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] C# Source Code Here's a zip file with the converted Batik interfaces (plus a couple classes), along with the UML for Visio Arch (I think there is a free viewer if you don't have Visio). I started to go thru the DOM interfaces and compare them to the W3C. If anyone else wants to grab another section of code and start fixing, go right ahead. I think we all agree the changing the interfaces slightly to me .Net naming conventions is the "right" thing to do. BTW, I found a Java binding example in the W3C Core DOM documentation, and there are naming standard changes, so I guess it is alright. DX _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com |
|
From: <AW...@UR...> - 2002-02-17 16:47:53
|
VS.Net is nice but I'm not going to buy it for home use; and my experience of SharpDevelop has been very positive. Is it possible to be IDE agnostic? - as long as we standardize on NANT to compile and build. Andrew Coats |
|
From: Don X. <do...@ho...> - 2002-02-17 02:24:06
|
Here's a zip file with the converted Batik interfaces (plus a couple classes), along with the UML for Visio Arch (I think there is a free viewer if you don't have Visio). I started to go thru the DOM interfaces and compare them to the W3C. If anyone else wants to grab another section of code and start fixing, go right ahead. I think we all agree the changing the interfaces slightly to me .Net naming conventions is the "right" thing to do. BTW, I found a Java binding example in the W3C Core DOM documentation, and there are naming standard changes, so I guess it is alright. DX _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com |
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-17 00:16:24
|
I've been playing with SharpDevelop for the past couple of weeks. I actually just submitted an Add-In extension to the project lead yesterday that should be in the next release. It's still pretty rough around the edges (v is 0.87, so it's not yet feature complete) but there is real potential there. Especially for those of us who can't yet shell out $1000+ for VS.NET. Standardizing on an IDE would help us collaborate and share work. don kackman -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of AW...@UR... Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 1:57 PM To: svg...@li... Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Name poll and other things 1) Sharp Vector Graphics - i guess we will have to use SharpDevelop - http://www.icsharpcode.net/OpenSource/SD/default.asp. 2) I vote for the .Net naming convention. 3) I'm looking forward to seeing the Visio diagram of all the classes - as SVG of course! We have VS.Arch at work. Rational XDE sounds good too - because it keeps the code and the diagrams in sync. Andrew Coats _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |
|
From: <AW...@UR...> - 2002-02-16 19:54:40
|
1) Sharp Vector Graphics - i guess we will have to use SharpDevelop - http://www.icsharpcode.net/OpenSource/SD/default.asp. 2) I vote for the .Net naming convention. 3) I'm looking forward to seeing the Visio diagram of all the classes - as SVG of course! We have VS.Arch at work. Rational XDE sounds good too - because it keeps the code and the diagrams in sync. Andrew Coats |
|
From: Don X. <do...@ho...> - 2002-02-15 03:16:05
|
Don, As soon as I get a chance (maybe tomorrow morning) I'll post the converted interfaces up on the site. In looking at some of the DOM stuff, I wasn't particularly happy with it's W3C compliance. I don't know if it is due to quirks in the Java language, but things like read only attributes were declared as methods starting with Get______. I took the generated C# interfaces and ran them thru the new Visio UML tools. Nice!!! I could easily rearrange the object hierarchy, change interface names, then regnerate the C# code, and everything is updated correctly (including the namespaces). It should be a lot easier to do mass changes on the object structure with Visio. Which is why I haven't published the stuff I got yet. Anyone else in the group have the new Visio distributed with VS.Net Arch? Anyone want to help fix what we have to meet the W3C standards (or something pretty close, but to .Net naming standards)? For those of you that don't know the SVG DOM the spec will be you bible. You can get it here: http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/ You can get the IDL for the SVG DOM here: http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/idl.html The DOM spec is here: http://www.w3.org/DOM/DOMTR - I think the SVG DOM is based on Level 2. The DOM IDL for level 2 is here: http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-DOM-Level-2-Core-20001113/idl-definitions.html Don >From: "Donald Kackman" <do...@it...> >To: "Svgdomcsharp-Developers" ><svg...@li...> >Subject: RE: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Name Poll And other things >Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 16:15:40 -0600 > >1) I like Sharp Vector Graphics. It's got a nice ring to it :) > >2) Since this library is going to be used by .NET developers I vote for the >.NET conventions. It will make the whole thing more familiar and easy to >use >for the people who are actually using it. > >3) Don, are you going to put the Batik outputs into SourceForge? I'd like >to >have a look so I can get my feet wet a little with the SVG DOM. > >don kackman _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. |
|
From: Donald K. <do...@it...> - 2002-02-14 22:15:44
|
1) I like Sharp Vector Graphics. It's got a nice ring to it :) 2) Since this library is going to be used by .NET developers I vote for the .NET conventions. It will make the whole thing more familiar and easy to use for the people who are actually using it. 3) Don, are you going to put the Batik outputs into SourceForge? I'd like to have a look so I can get my feet wet a little with the SVG DOM. don kackman -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...]On Behalf Of Don XML Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 9:15 AM To: svg...@li... Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Name Poll And other things We might as well start to use this new discussion group. I've got lots of very good emails from members of this group. but I think we need to discuss this stuff publicly. 1) Name of the Project: Do you want to give the project a decent name? It might make it easier to reference this project. I was thinking of something along the lines of Sharp Vectors or Sharp Vector Graphics, or Sharp Vector Group. If you have any other ideas, post them to the group. 2) Naming Conventions: We obviously need to pick a naming convention and stick to it. Do we want to use the W3C object names, or modify them to .Net standards? I'm torn between the two choices. I want to make things W3C compliant, but I also want to stick to .Net standards. Let's discuss it. 3) Namespaces and logical division of work: We are going to break the W3C down into namespaces, and then chose which parts we are interested in working with. Batik already did some of the work. THe question is do we just want to adopt their apporach, or adapt it and make it better. I was thinking along the lines of getting ready for the SVG 1.1 and componentization. I guess that's enough to get us started. Remember to have fun doing this, and try to think outside the box and expand your mind. Don _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |
