Howdy LLRP Tool Kit (LTK) folks,
I believe one of the most important tenants of the LTK is that
all API implementations - across programming languages
and platforms - support XML of LLRP messages that can be exchanged.
This opens the door for many conveniences such as communicating
best practices and furnishing details with support requests.
The names for XML elements, enumerated values, etc, are the
tricky part. It follows that an API implementation is likely to use
function and class/structure names derived from those element names.
There are (so far) two machine processable descriptions of LLRP.
The names for things differ. Maybe not much, but enough.
Converging descriptions means that names are going to change
and it follows that programming names may change, too.
They don't have to, of course, but it seems counterproductive
to introduce features into descriptions to preserve differing
names for things.
Before we launch into discussions about how to converge,
let's see if it matters.
Are there opinions on consistent, exchangeable XML descriptions
of LLRP messages? Is this important to folks? Unimportant?
Regards,
-gww
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
llrp-toolkit-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/llrp-toolkit-devel
