Hi,

On Feb 19, 2008 5:21 PM, Andy Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gang -
>
> As part of the fix for TRINIDAD-822, I am proposing to add a new
> getAccessibilityProfile() API to RequestContext (and now that I think
> about it, to RenderingContext as well).  Both RequestContext and
> RenderingContext are abstract.  In order to avoid breaking any
> existing implementations out there, I was thinking that I would follow
> the normal convention and add non-abstract methods with a default
> implementation (return null I guess, maybe throw an assertion just to
> catch some attention).  However, I noticed that when we recently added
> the isAnimationEnabled() methods to RequestContext/RenderingContext,
> we added these as abstract methods.  So I am wondering whether the
> assumption is that, though these abstract base classes are technically
> part of the public API, practically speaking nobody outside of
> Trinidad is going to provide concrete subclasses.
>
> So, for new API additions to RequestContext/RenderingContext -
> abstract methods okay or should we be providing default
> implementations?

I am fine with adding abstract methods, instead of concrete ones (yes,
that breaks things).
I also doubt, that there are tons of impls of these classes available.

-Matthias
>
> Andy
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org

Reply via email to