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

Re: Your comments on Device Description Repository Simple API ( LC-1972)

From: <rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:54:33 +0000
To: (wrong string) é Manuel Cantera <jmcf@tid.es>
Cc: public-ddwg-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1K1kSX-0000mk-GN@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:

Please review it carefully and let us know by email at
public-ddwg-comments@w3.org if you agree with it or not before 9 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


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

 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-DDR-Simple-API-20080404/


Your comment on 4.2.1 Evidence Interface:
> + Section 4.2.1 Evidence Interface
> Is the Evidence interface a generic interface or an specific interface
> for representing Evidence in the form of HTTP headers?
> If it is a generic interface, as I see it, then 1. Add Evidence
> should be repharased to:
>  AddEvidence(key,value)
> Query Evidence (key)
> Retrieve Evidence (key)

Working Group Resolution (LC-1972):
The interface description makes it clear how key/value pairs are used.
Within the context of the API, the interface is used with respect to
header names and header values, and is described in these terms. For
clarity, the description mentions the possibility of using the interface
for other key/value data but does not go any further to describe such
generic use. Additional commentary regarding generic usage might be made
available through other means, but remains out of scope for the normative

Received on Thursday, 29 May 2008 15:55:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:41:40 UTC