On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Dwarkaprasad Dayama < dwarka.dayama at samsung.com> wrote:
> Hi Carsten, > > You understood right about 1st point, there is possiblity of break in > interop. > > Since Open Source can have more than 1 release in between 2 major release > of Spec, there is possibility of "alpha" in an Ioivity version released > between 2 major release of Spec. > Hence IoTivity can have all OLD features and partial/some NEW feature. In > such instance IoTivity's own versioning mechanism will be required. > What Carsten said. Protocol versions and implementation versions are completely separate things, as far as I can see. Implementations either support protocol versions A, B, ... or they don't. Vendors are always free to try to distinguish their OCF implementations by adding features; that's not relevant for protocol-level interop. The protocol already contains all the mechanism needed for a vendor to communicate a supported feature or version id or whatever: by exposing that info as a resource or property. IMO it would be a mistake to standardize that in the protocol spec. It would inhibit competition and unfairly privilege Iotivity. Iotivity is just one OCF implementation (actually several already). If OCF wins wide acceptance I think we can expect to see many more, just like we have many HTTP server implementations. -Gregg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20161209/9e290574/attachment.html>
