[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: Package names for SDO Java Specification
|
Hi Ron, The question from the SCA/J TC was about use of org.osoa
in the package name … I’m not sure what the problem would be with
the “common.sdo” part but I’ll need more clarification from
you. Mary From: Barack, Ron
[mailto:ron.barack@sap.com] Hi Mary, There are 2 packages involved: commonj.sdo and commonj.sdo.helper Thanks, Ron Von: Mary McRae
[mailto:marypmcrae@gmail.com] Hi Ron, Can you be more explicit as to the package names
you’d like approved? I’m guessing you’re referring to the
prefix information … Thanks, Mary From: Barack, Ron
[mailto:ron.barack@sap.com] Hi Mary,
The SDO TC
has expressed the desire to continue to use the "commonj.sdo" package
names for all interfaces defined by the SDO/J specification. We are aware
that a similar request has come from the SCA/J TC, and the request was finally
rejected. However, one of the rationals for this decision was that SCA
does not have an existing user base. This is not the case for SDO.
Serveral companies have existing products that use the "commonj.sdo"
package. These products have a wide customer base. We expect a push
back from our users if we now require repackaging. The will be a
significant blow to the acceptance of SDO 3, of the entire SDO TC effort.
Because of this, we would like to request that we be allowed to use the
"commonj.sdo" package. Of course,
this does not affect the namespaces used in any XML and XSDs that we
define. For XML, we will continue to use the OASIS standard namespaces. Thank you
for your consideration, |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]