[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sdo] Priorities for SDO 3
Hi Guys, I'm pretty much in agreement with Ron's priorities. The only change I would make is that at least some amount of "Organization of SDO Type System and Helpers" is a "Must Have". I think SDO 3 should at least provide a clean HelperProvider class that implementations don't need to replace (i.e., the comment in HelperProvider.java: "This class may be replaced by another implementation." is a very ugly approach). I'm planning to send some ideas on this soon. Thanks, Frank "Barack, Ron" <ron.barack@sap.com> 01/09/2009 07:37 AM To <sdo@lists.oasis-open.org> cc Subject [sdo] Priorities for SDO 3 Hi Everyone, Looking over our the main points in our charter, I would assign the priorities as follows High Priority: Enhancements to Static SDO (especially harmonization with other frameworks such as JAXB and JPA) Improved XML/XSD Support (our minimum requirement here is to be able to parse and generate any XML document) Should Have: Organization of SDO Type System and Helpers Enhancements to SDO Metadata Nice to Have: Features related to the Data Access Services (DAS) Specification Not Required: Notification Support Interoperability with .NET SDO XML Path Support Service Level Programming API Already Completed: Relaxing containment requirements Very Mixed Feelings About: API cleanup, especially using Generics in the official APIs. - Certainly, the small issues here should be worked on, I'm more concerned about a large refactoring of the APIs. So far, SDO 3 is shaping up to be backwards compatible with 2.1. Much as I think having a central class with 160 methods severely hurts our acceptance, I'm not sure that cleaning up the API alone is worth breaking backwards compatibility. Best Regards, Ron
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]