RE: ACTION-159: review of API document

Hi Wonsuk,

> > * Section 1 Introduction
> > - I think one or two sentences could be added to the introdcution
> stating
> > that many issues are open and that some of the definitions are
> provisional.
> 
> Agreed about additional sentences.
> But I don't understand about definitions. Could you let me know which
> definitions are required?

Definitions of return types, and similar issues that are still under discussion
 
> > - as mentioned in my earlier comments to the list, it is not clear to
> me
> > why some getters only return a single value (e.g. title), especially
> if
> > there are qualifiers for subtypes/roles.
> 
> Right. I agree we have to make clear this issue for each interface.
> Do you want to make clear return value for some interfaces for FPWD?

No, I do not think we can reach a final decision for FPWD, thus my suggestion above to state that some of these definitions are preliminary.

Best regards,
Werner

Received on Monday, 12 October 2009 14:31:03 UTC