16 Apr
2009
16 Apr
'09
11:04 a.m.
Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net> writes:
Quoting [Alexis Richardson] (Apr 16 2009):
Is it your view that:
1. These should NOT be described in the API 2. These should be described but in a 'non core' section of the API
3. these would be described in the API (core or non-core) but would be marked 'Optional' (*)
(*) implementations would still be standard compliant if they do not provide these optional methods, and flag a respecitve error when these get called.
Personally I think (3) is the natural thing to do too. Best wishes, Chris.