On May 14, 2008, at 4:42 PM, Damian Krzeminski wrote:
> I'll commit it: I wrote a simple test that I wanted to include.
> Thanks for testing this.
The more I look at this, the more I see that the XML-RPC API for
FreeSWITCH mod_conference does not lend itself to the
XmlRpcInterceptor approach well at all. It's because of the awkward
way the API is defined. This can best be illustrated with some examples.
Ex.1) To list the conferences: "conference list" - in this case, the
command comes directly after 'conference'.
Ex.2) To mute user #3 in the conference "MyConf1": "conference MyConf1
mute 3" - in this case, one of the arguments (MyConf1) comes before
the actual command (mute 3).
If I understand the interceptor approach we are using, this looks to
me like the intercepted method calls would have to look like:
Ex.1) freeswitchApi.conference("list");
Ex.2) freeswitchApi.conference("MyConf1", "mute", 3);
I think this syntax is very awkward. Do you see what I mean?
Why not re-define these API methods we're using in a more readable and
clean format? For example, it could be something like:
Ex.1) freeswitchApi.listConferences();
Ex.2) freeswitchApi.conferenceMute("MyConf1", 3);
If you still think we should stick with the current approach
(XmlRpcInterceptor), I'm fine with that - but I just think the syntax
is really ugly and counterintuitive.
--
/**
* Joe Attardi
* Bluesocket, Inc.
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* 781-494-1083
*/
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
