W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ddwg-comments@w3.org > May 2008

Re: Your comments on Device Description Repository Simple API ( LC-1957)

From: <rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 20:21:47 +0000
To: (wrong string) é Manuel Cantera <
Cc: public-ddwg-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1K0Mix-0004D1-AC@farnsworth.w3.org>


 Dear José Manuel Cantera ,

The Mobile Web Initiative Device Description Working Group has reviewed
the comments you sent [1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the Device
Description Repository Simple API published on 4 Apr 2008. Thank you for
having taken the time to review the document and to send us comments!

The Working Group's response to your comment is included below, and has
been implemented in the new version of the document available at:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/drafts/api/080525.

Please review it carefully and let us know by email at
public-ddwg-comments@w3.org if you agree with it or not before 5 June
2008. In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide a specific
solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group. If such a
consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the opportunity to raise a
formal objection which will then be reviewed by the Director during the
transition of this document to the next stage in the W3C Recommendation
Track.

Thanks,

For the Mobile Web Initiative Device Description Working Group,
Matt Womer
W3C Staff Contact

 1.
http://www.w3.org/mid/93AA9E47B82F684A868C217766F489050397FB9EFB@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet
 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-DDR-Simple-API-20080404/


=====

Your comment on Create Evidence from Map public Evidence
newHTTPEvidence(...:
> Regarding the method
> 
> Service.newHttpEvidence(Map<String,String>)
> 
> this method will force implementations of the DDR Simple API to execute
> on Java 1.5 and above.
> This fact will avoid existing solutions deployed on Java 1.4 to migrate
> to the DDR Simple API. As sometimes in production environments it is
> difficult to do a migration due to dependencies with legacy
> applications, sys admin policies, etc, etc, this seems to be a critical
> issue. That's because we are requesting to change it to
> newHttpEvidence(Map)
> 
> Proposed Amendment
> 
> + Change Service.newHttpEvidence(Map<String,String>) to
> Service.newHttpEvidence(Map)
> 
> In the description of the method it should be said that implementations
> must iterate over the keys of the map calling the toString method to
> obtain the header names, and must iterate over the values of the map
> calling the toString method to obtain the header values.


Working Group Resolution (LC-1957):
The specification references the most current version of Java where Map is
qualified with the types involved in the mapping. We take on board that
many readers of the specification will be working with older Java
versions, so we propose to add some additional guidance for implementers
to say that "in the case of implementation environments where the default
Map is from Object to Object, such as in Java 1.4, the key and value
parameters should be cast to String".

----
Received on Sunday, 25 May 2008 20:22:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 25 May 2008 20:22:28 GMT