Stefano, I disagree. Those features are nice to have but they add to the minimal size of an implementation, which would be inappropriate on a constrained platform such as mobile phone. Also completion would work much differently on a T9-based input device versus a conventional keyboard.
The aspect of the OSGi command prompt that MUST be standardised is the extensibility mechanism, i.e. adding new commands to the shell. Currently one must implement these extensions differently on each framework, which limits their value. Less critical but still IMHO important is a standardised syntax and set of "core" commands. If these are standard across different frameworks then technical documentation (manuals, tutorials etc) can be written without endless instructions to "type X on Equinox, Y on Felix, Z on Knopflerfish..."). Above this base, each framework should be free to implement whatever value-add features it like such as history and completion, but I don't think those features should be part of the specification. Regards, Neil On 3/11/08, Stefano Lenzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter Kriens wrote: > > The OSGi is currently working on a standard in this area. We have > > finished the RFPs and started working on the RFC. So if you have inputs, > > please let them be known. > > I think that: > - Command History > - Command and Option completion. Also either Command and Option > completion should provide help information during the listing of the > available chooses > are a *must have* user requirement of the standard console. > > My two cent, > Stefano "Kismet" Lenzi > > _______________________________________________ > OSGi Developer Mail List > [email protected] > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev > _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
