On 31 March 2015 at 05:49, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > I was surprised to see an interace called IRI. When I see IRI, I expect a > class like the JRE's URI (or URL), not an interface. > > This interface looks more like a IRIProvider to me.
If it was implemented as a class, then every implementation would need to extend it to make it suit their system, or we create it as a final class and hope it suits everyone, which doesn't work. It is not within our scope to dictate the internal workings of the systems we are trying to provide interoperability for. In particular, libraries written in non-Java-JVM languages will have different assumptions to the Java based implementations. Although they mostly provide interoperability with Java, the interfaces should be applicable to them in the same way as the Java libraries. If the entire API is written using interfaces, they have less Java-specific details to work around. Cheers, Peter
