- From: Gunnar Andersson <gandersson@genivi.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 17:09:38 +0000
- To: Rudolf J Streif <rudolf.streif@ibeeto.com>, Magnus Feuer <mfeuer1@jaguarlandrover.com>, Ulf Bjorkengren <ulfbjorkengren@geotab.com>
- Cc: W3C Public Automotive <public-automotive@w3.org>
On Tue, 2020-01-21 at 07:33 -0800, Rudolf J Streif wrote: > I thought about using an attribute to define what an overlay does > before. I came to the conclusion that it is not that good of a > solution as it makes adoption of somebody else's overlay tree quite > complex as you have to go through every single file and look if you > like the overlay or not. > > If the whole concept of it is really necessary, and I am not quite > sold on that in the first place, then there should be a toplevel way > of doing it. I agree and there is a very hand-wavy slide in the deck about another "meta" level above the layers... To try to be more concrete: I think this means basically a top level file, likely also using YAML syntax, that defines the existence and purpose of various Layers (including characteristics such as what suffix files of that type should use). Just like for the VSS concept in general, I'd expect that idea, if it gets properly defined, to be usable both for common agreements about layer types (specified in VSS documentation and thus shared in the industry), and proprietary layer definitions inside a company (because collectively we might not envision every possibly usage of this). - Gunnar
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2020 17:09:45 UTC