Re: Your comments on Device Description Repository Simple API ( LC-1956)

 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/93AA9E47B82F684A868C217766F489050397FB9EF3@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet
 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-DDR-Simple-API-20080404/


=====

Your comment on Get Data Version public String getDataVersion();
Returns...:
> Regarding the method getDataVersion of the Service interface,
> 
> It is said
> 
> "Returns information about the underlying data (values for Properties)
> if the implementation has a versioning system for that information. If
> it does have a versioning system for data then this value must change
> between calls if the implementation can not guarantee that the data is
> the same. If the implementation does not support versioning of data
> then a SystemException should be thrown."
> 
> In the description of the method the word "if the implementation ..."
> appears in several occasions. This is a signal of a method that can be
> specific for some implementations but unneeded for others. Besides, it
> can be very hard to figure out if the underlying data has changed, for
> example if there are frequent updates to a database behind a DDR.
> Additionally there is no point knowing the data version as whole as it
> does not provide any kind of valuable information to the user of the
> API.
> 
> Proposed Amendment:
> 
> + Remove the getDataVersion method of the Service interface


Working Group Resolution (LC-1956):
The DDWG has resolved to simplify the getDataVersion description to say
only that when the method is invoked it will return the version of the
device description data or a particular constant value (to be defined in
the specification), which would indicate that versioning of the data is
not supported. There will be no specific mention of throwing a
SystemException since such exceptions may be thrown by any method.

----

Received on Sunday, 25 May 2008 20:22:24 UTC