Re: Call for volunteers for C/C++ API liaison manager

On 05/01/2014 11:40 AM, Thomas Nadeau wrote:
> I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I just don't see why that 
> is going to be useful to anyone. If you were talking about open source 
> and/or reference implementations that the source was available for, 
> then that makes far more sense to me. --Tom 
With some protocols (thinking iCal) the implementors can produce 
incomparable objects. An API can clarify the object model (Oh this is 
how you use it), simplify application development (I do not have to 
spend time making sure I invent an API that will work with all of these 
object permutations and across vendors and vendor objects),
Look at IMAP, almost everyone started with or at least looked at the 
Mark Crispin code from UofW. If your core business model is making code 
that someone else has already defined, good luck making much money. A 
predefined API allows companies to adopt a protocol and stay focused on 
their core business model.
A working group hashed out API would always be a better starting point 
than alone and in a closet code that sucks cash from a company that 
really wants to produce a product.
And I also think that it would be nice if people would create open 
source code that was reviewed by a working group and referenced or 
hosted by the IETF.
VoIP is another example. It would save a lot of time if I knew I could 
use a thought out API, even if I had to implement the code.
Protocol without API == minimum.
API with out code == useful.
API with code == ideal.

--

Doug Royer - (K7DMR.us / DougRoyer.com)
DouglasRoyer(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
714-989-6135

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature