RE: ISSUE-14: Gathering requirements [System Info & Events]

right you have explained it better than me ...

Best Regards

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Breitschwerdt, Christian, VF-Group [mailto:christian.breitschwerdt@vodafone.com] 
Enviado el: lunes, 05 de octubre de 2009 12:05
Para: Robin Berjon; JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA
CC: Tran, Dzung D; public-device-apis@w3.org
Asunto: RE: ISSUE-14: Gathering requirements [System Info & Events]

Hi Robin,

I think Jose's requirement was alluding to the separation of API to
access system information on one side from the actual ontology (as in
http://www.w3.org/TR/dcontology/) on the other side.

By example of the BONDI APIs for DeviceSatus
http://bondi.omtp.org/1.01/apis/devicestatus.html the API definition
itself does not say what system information it allows access to - this
is all handled by the BONDI name-spaced vocabulary. 

IMO the requirement is quite sensible but it bags the question how to
define baselines of vocabularies to be supported.

Regards,
Christian 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-device-apis-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Robin Berjon
> Sent: Montag, 5. Oktober 2009 11:20
> To: JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA
> Cc: Tran, Dzung D; public-device-apis@w3.org
> Subject: Re: ISSUE-14: Gathering requirements [System Info & Events]
> 
> On Oct 5, 2009, at 09:50 , JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA wrote:
> > here goes a very important non-functional requirement:
> >
> > The System Info and Events API should be extensible and not 
> > constrained to the properties the DAP group defines but any 
> property 
> > that now or in the future might appear.
> 
> That one is fairly simple to address, in Javascript all 
> interfaces are extensible, whatever we do doesn't jail us the 
> way Java interfaces did.
> 
> --
> Robin Berjon
>    robineko - setting new standards
>    http://robineko.com/
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 5 October 2009 10:56:34 UTC