Yes, that is a reasonable thing to do and a fairly common practice. By
defining your data types in a .proto file you have the advantage that
anyone can manipulate them in any language that has a protobuf
implementation.

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 6:26 PM Rex Coldren <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am on a project where we are looking to create a standard .proto file
> that can be used by multiple vendors to create interoperable
> implementations of an open, standard interface that we are developing. The
> .proto file would be specified in the standard, along with pointers to the
> Google Protocol Buffers Developers site. It would be up to the vendors
> implementing this standard interface to compile the .proto file using their
> preferred source language. Is this an OK thing to do?
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Protocol Buffers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/0fe52780-08b0-47a1-89a8-113cd4084317%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/0fe52780-08b0-47a1-89a8-113cd4084317%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/CADqAXr5J8JG3YuVmCFgNh8%3D9kytroZdHFFmHL6oeQUxyNggCNw%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to