FAQ on OpenOffice.org API
- From which languages can I use the OpenOffice.org -API?
- What is the difference between UNO IDL and CORBA?
- What's the "size" of the API specification?
- How is the documentation of the API done?
- What is the "size" of the API 実施?
- Do you have any documentation or examples for Java programmers?
- Why are there some interfaces in the OpenOffice.org -API which are not 器具／実施するd in any OpenOffice.org 構成要素?
- How can I find out, if I 現実に can use a 確かな interface of the OpenOffice.org -API?
- Are there interfaces to build 構内／化合物 文書s like Microsoft's OLE?
- How is 衝突 解決するd on design 問題／発行するs?
- What is your 役割, Michael H?nnig?
From which languages can I use the OpenOffice.org -API?
 |
OpenOffice.org 器具／実施するs the API with UNO (全世界の／万国共通の 網状組織 反対するs). 現在／一般に there are language bindings for Java and C++. You can 器具／実施する your own language binding, and in fact we are 活発に looking for a volunteer to create a C language binding.
Additionally UNO 許すs 支配（する）／統制する from scripting languages and scripting 環境s (for example debuggers). 現在／一般に StarBASIC (VBA syntax 両立できる) can call on the API and there is a 原型 written for Python 統合，差別撤廃. |
What is the difference between UNO IDL and CORBA IDL?
|
UNO IDL is based on CORBA IDL, but additionally it supports
 相続物件 for exceptions and structures, 割り当てるd values for enums, a new stereotype "service"(連合させるs interfaces and 所有物／資産／財産s). And 現在／一般に it does not support: arrays as defined types unions
|
What is the "size" of the API specification?
| The API consists of about 2000 とじ込み／提出するs, each 明示するing one type. A type in this 尊敬（する）・点 can be a service, an interface, a struct, an exception, a constant group, or an enum. These とじ込み／提出するs total in about 6 MB of data. |
How is the documentation of the API done?
|
A 言及／関連 like documentation consists within the IDL とじ込み／提出するs. The syntax of the documentation is based on JavaDoc with a few 拡張s to 示す identifiers. We are 現在／一般に developing a new 発生させる人（物） for this syntax which will 生成する HTML 文書s 直接／まっすぐに from the IDLs.
Our Developers Guide 述べるs the 概念s of all 構成要素s within OpenOffice.org which have an API. It is the best 資源 to start learning about the API. Additionally we have a tutorial for StarBASIC programmers. It explains the basic 概念s, shows some UML diagrams of the 構成要素 structure and has plenty of 文書d examples of the API usage. |
What is the "size" of the API 実施?
|
It's hard to impossible to find out. 現在／一般に the API 実施 is just a wrapper to a 核心 API for the most parts. Only newer 構成要素s 直接／まっすぐに 器具／実施する the API. Thus, there is really not much point in finding out how much code 器具／実施するs the API - and it even makes いっそう少なく sense in the 未来. Depending on the 視野, we probably can say: The whole OpenOffice.org is an 実施 of the API, 特に because more and more features are using the API of other 構成要素s for 統合，差別撤廃. |
Do you have any documentation or examples for Java programmers?
| In the UDK 事業／計画（する） you can find documentation on the language binding for Java. There are some Java examples in the StarOffice SDK which might be helpful for you. |
Why are there some interfaces in the OpenOffice.org -API which are not 器具／実施するd in any OpenOffice.org 構成要素?
|
The OpenOffice.org -API is 現実に more like a specification than an API of a preexisting 実施. Thus there are at several 推論する／理由s why there are interfaces without any 実施:
|
How can I find out if I can use a 確かな interface of the OpenOffice.org -API?
| Check for a service which 輸出（する）s this interface, then check for a 構成要素 which 約束s to supports this service. Keep optional interfaces in mind (について言及するd in the 輸出（する） documentation of the service). If the 構成要素 you're using still does not 器具／実施する the interface, it's a bug. In the latter 事例／患者, please 報告（する）／憶測 the bug to the owner of the 構成要素. If it's a specification bug, they will 今後 it to the owner of the specification. |
Are there interfaces to build 構内／化合物 文書s like Microsoft's OLE?
| Within StarOffice API there are no interfaces 権利 now for building 構内／化合物 文書s. Our idea is to use the Bonobo model for this 目的. |
How is 衝突 解決するd on design 問題／発行するs?
|
To begin with, the API is positioned as 存在 a specification which keeps a 焦点（を合わせる）
on an orthogonal structure and reusability. On the other 手渡す we tried to be
as 類似の to Java as possible. Usability from both 味方するs, the 実施
and the use itself, is another important point. And here often we have to make
妥協s - いつかs even because there is a preexisting 実施.
If there are 衝突s, we try to find 合意. Just listen to all arguments, give time to find new ones, before あわてて make 決定／判定勝ち（する）s. Try to find a 解答 everybody is comfortable with. |
