RE: Your comments on Device Description Repository Simple API ( LC-1955)

I accept this response

-----Mensaje original-----
De: rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com [mailto:rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com]
Enviado el: domingo, 25 de mayo de 2008 22:22
Para: JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA
CC: public-ddwg-comments@w3.org
Asunto: Re: Your comments on Device Description Repository Simple API ( LC-1955)


 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/93AA9E47B82F684A868C217766F489050397FB9EEE@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet
 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-DDR-Simple-API-20080404/


=====

Your comment on 4.2.4 PropertyValue Interface:
> Regarding the PropertyValues interface,
>
> there are no convenience methods on that interface that allow to
> retrieve PropertyValues without dealing with a PropertyRef.
>
> However the Service interface has a lot of convenience methods that
> avoid dealing with PropertyRef if necessary.
>
> This seems to be a bit contradictory in the design of the API.
>
> Proposed Amendment:
>
> + Add a getValue(localPropertyName) method Add a
> + getValue(localPropertyName,localAspectName,vocabularyIRI)
> method
>
> to the PropertyValues interface
>
> ---
>
> Jose Manuel Cantera
> Senior Technologist
>
> Telefónica I+D


Working Group Resolution (LC-1955):
The "convenience" methods of the DDR Simple API are contained within the Service interface, with which you may create the PropertyRef needed by the
PropertyValues.getValue() method. There is no loss of functionality by not having a convenient version of getValue() in the PropertyValues interface.

A typical usage would be: pv.getValue(s.newPropertyRef("propName"))

Instances of PropertyRef created via the Service interface may be cached for subsequent use in calls to getValue().

----

Received on Monday, 26 May 2008 08:47:01 UTC