[openi18n-im:01430] Re: IM_FILE_OPERATION specification

Hi,

I want to define IM_FILE_OPERATIONS as for protocl v4 not v3.

I think a spec always delay from implementation.
Because of stablity of spec is proofed by the implementation.
In fact, we have just finished implementing v3 protcol on every client framework
at r12.4 w/o FILE_OPERATIONS. The latest one is Emacs client framework.
# Thanks Taichi!!

It is saying that we can fix v3 protocol now and then we should call
protocol as v4 after r12.4.

And then I want to propose changing filename as spec_v3.html from spec.html.
I think we should refer old spec for backward compatibility for future.
To do that, we should leave old spec as is.
In same point of view, v4 draft spec may be spec_v4.html.

The same thing is able to say for openI18N.org site.
We publish v3 draft as up-to-date IIIMF protocol.
It causes messing up contributers.

Kasha, How do you think about?

At Tue, 21 Jun 2005 15:41:22 +0900,
AShiZaWa KaZuNoRi wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I've updated doc/protocol/spec.html to include description of
> IM_FILE_OPERATION message and related data types.  Please take a
> look at this, and please suggest any improvements.
> 
> I'll start to enhance the current implementation (libiiimp.so)
> with this definition.
> 

-- 
Hiroshi Miura  --- [email protected], Mobile --- [email protected]
NTTDATA Corp. OpenSource Software Center. --- [email protected] 
NTTDATA Intellilink Corp. OpenSource Engineering Dev. -- [email protected]
Kobe Institute of Computing Graduate School of IT - Lecturer -- [email protected]
Key id=04AB8617 fingerprint=9117 9407 5684 FBF1 4063  15B4 401D D077 04AB 8617