<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.0.6619.12">
<TITLE>Re: [fdo-internals] RFC Reminder</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Hi Greg<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for the comment. I'll address your concerns and update the RFC.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
<BR>
Thomas<BR>
<BR>
--------------------------<BR>
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org <fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org><BR>
To: FDO Internals Mail List <fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org><BR>
Sent: Mon Jul 30 19:24:23 2007<BR>
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC Reminder<BR>
<BR>
1) In order to remain consistent with the rest of the FDO API<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
enum FdoFunctionClass {<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_Aggregate,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_Conversion,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_Custom,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_Date,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_Intrinsic,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_Math,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_Numeric,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_String,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClass_Unspecified<BR>
<BR>
} // enum FdoFunctionClass<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Should use the word Type in its naming convention as follows….<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
enum FdoFunctionClassType {<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_Aggregate,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_Conversion,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_Custom,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_Date,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_Intrinsic,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_Math,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_Numeric,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_String,<BR>
<BR>
FdoFunctionClassType_Unspecified<BR>
<BR>
} // enum FdoFunctionClassType<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
NOTE: Subsequent required changes to the other API methods, documentation, etc, to indicate Type, is omitted for brevity sake.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
2) Can you add the required documentation for the public Create functions explaining the parameters, return types, usage, etc.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
3) Can you add simple code examples demonstrating how the new methods will be used?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
4) Can you add details on how the Managed API will have to be updated to reflect the proposed changes?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Greg<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
From: fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org [<A HREF="mailto:fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org">mailto:fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</A>] On Behalf Of Thomas Knoell<BR>
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 11:13 AM<BR>
To: FDO Internals Mail List<BR>
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC Reminder<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Hi everyone<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
As indicated in an e-mail dated July 17th, FDO RFC 5 (<A HREF="http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc5">http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc5</A>) had been posted and is ready for review. Please complete the review of the RFC and comment on it by end-of-day Tuesday, July 31st. If no changes are required, it is my intent to motion that a vote for the acceptance of RFC5 be made and subsequently voted on by the PSC.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Thomas<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>