W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ddwg@w3.org > November 2007

RE: [API] Code snippet I .- fast property retrieval (not unit aware)

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 07:34:49 -0000
Message-ID: <C8FFD98530207F40BD8D2CAD608B50B4904C84@mtldsvr01.DotMobi.local>
To: <public-ddwg@w3.org>


I think it would be better if we simply said tat string representations should not be used for testing equality - use .equals instead. It will be hard to ensure that different string representations are not the same for arbitrary values and units of measure.

And yes, +1 to that toString(); though we need to be clear that it returns the value without units i.e. it returns

0.000000000000000001

Not

0.000000000000000001 parsecs

Jo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Rotan Hanrahan
> Sent: 19 November 2007 23:22
> To: JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA; public-ddwg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [API] Code snippet I .- fast property retrieval (not unit
> aware)
> 
> 
> +1 to the proposal to have a toString() method in the property value
> class. We should also require that if two property value object represent
> different values (i.e. they are not equal) then their toString() methods
> should also return strings that are not equal.
> 
> I think the values returned should be boxed types. We should be able to
> make a reasonable assuption that the developer will know what return type
> is appropriate. I also think that helping the developer during compile
> time is useful, so appropriate typing that can be tested during
> implementation/compilation would be useful.
> 
> The "fast food" version is starting to look good.
> 
> ---R
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org on behalf of JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA
> Sent: Mon 19/11/2007 23:12
> To: public-ddwg@w3.org
> Subject: [API] Code snippet I .- fast property retrieval (not unit aware)
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Here a start a series of code snippets trying to center the discussion
> on the DDRPropertyValue object and its methods. The most simple property
> retrieval is the so-called fast food version. Here is an example
> 
> DDRPropertyValue value = ddr.getPropertyValue("resolution_width",key);
> System.out.println("Retrieved value:" + value.getValue());
> 
> So here comes the first question:
> 
> Now the DDRPropertyValue has a getValue method that returns an Object.
> Do we want it to be as generic as an object or do we want specific
> methods such as
> 
> getBoolean()
> getInteger()
> getDouble()
> getString()
> 
> ???
> 
> Also from my example it seems to be good (at least in Java) to have an
> implemented toString() method at the level of DDRPropertyValue that will
> return the property value as an String, simplifying even more the task
> for the developer, that will print the value with
> System.out.println(value) where value is a DDRPropertyValue object. That
> toString() method will actually call the getString() method.
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> ----
> José Manuel Cantera Fonseca
> Telefónica I+D
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 07:35:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:13:51 GMT