On Nov 10, 2011, at 11:22 , JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA wrote: > I still believe that having a generic mechanism for getting access to > device properties is useful and better than specific APIs, one for each > aspect. But isn't that for the most part covered by the Sensors API? What parts of SysInfo are not covered by either specific APIs or the generic one — that's what I'm asking. > In essence the problem here is the same as in the other APIs you want to > discontinue: it has to be made clear that the API you are discontinuing > can also be a viable and useful approach. The only thing is that DAP has > decided to follow a different path. But does not mean that other options > are not valid. I understand that, and will draft a text that I hope will satisfy your concerns. But the case of SysInfo is different: its functionality seems to have been taken over by other documents completely, with one of those having a rather comparable design. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjonReceived on Thursday, 10 November 2011 10:40:42 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:32:32 UTC