- From: Ignacio Marin <ignacio.marin@fundacionctic.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 10:04:54 +0100
- To: José Manuel Cantera Fonseca <jmcf@tid.es>, "Jo Rabin" <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
- Cc: <public-ddwg@w3.org>
> + I'm missing a newHttpEvidence() method. We agree that the Java binding > is gonna also have a newHttpEvidence(Map) but the method with no > parameters is also needed as it is the only method present in IDL and in > every language binding +1, per my previous email last night. I had not developed this part enough. A no-parameter version is needed. > + I'm a bit worried about the complexity of the overloading that we are > putting in place We should think of what is gonna be the most common use > case and model it in a convenience function and leave the other cases > behind the SimplePropertyRef and SimpleProperty interfaces +1, per my last email about convenience functions vs complexity. > Also I'm not very convinced that we need to have in everyplace the word > 'Simple', that could be left in the package name ... If Simple is spread everywhere, I guess you might be right Nacho Best Regards Jo Rabin escribió: > > I've uploaded an edited copy of the latest Java interfaces as I > believe agreed on list. However, there are a couple of instances of > editorial discretion wrt names etc. > > > > Seeing as I am very short of time I'd like people to review this and > make any comments known _/before/_ I go ahead and edit/issue a new > draft. I'm going to hold off producing the draft till tomorrow. > > > > You will find the new interfaces at > > > > http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/drafts/api/simple/java/org/w3c/ddr/simple/ > > > > Jo > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 09:05:11 UTC