Proposed removal of some Command Objects

[Peter Junge <peter.junge@gmx.org>]

Hi,

I just had a look at the Command Objects (SHADOW... etc.) that Kaihong 
had proposed for removal from UOML Version 1.1 during todays meeting. If 
this will be possible depends strongly on the default behavior of 
handling unknown Command Objects, which doesn't seem to be defined yet 
in the UOML specification.

So, if the default behavior of processing unknown Command Objects would 
be "IGNORE", then I do not see any issue to remove the proposed Command 
Objects from the spec, because implementations do not have to care about 
them. But, if the default behavior would be "STOP Processing", then UOML 
Version 1.1 might cause big issues with existing implementations.

As the typical behavior of all programming languages I know is "STOP 
PROCESSING" at unknown commands, I would assume that implementers have 
exclusively chosen this behavior. Consequently, I cannot recommend 
removing Command Objects in case my assumptions here are correct. If 
not, please share your points of view.

A safe alternative to handle the issue might be to keep these Command 
Objects but marking them as 'deprecated' or 'legacy' and recommending 
not to use them in future implementations.

Best regards,
peter