-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 122
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Accepted with Revisions] SDL 0321 - Add Current Template Name to Window Capabilities #1087
Comments
1. I believe we should add documentation to both this proposal and the RPC changes that the values contained in the new param should only be of the values included in the 2. Because of the fact that we have ran into this in other implementations when dealing with optional parameters, it should be clear in the proposal that if the param is not included it is assumed that the template that was previously supplied is still valid. Therefore, the HMI does not need to send this param if the template itself hasn't changed. |
3
I think it's good to add a template name parameter, 4
You should include a sample code on how to use this parameter for a perfectly reliable update. |
1. Because the template doesn't have to be a 2. I agree and can add that. 3. Are you asking to add an additional API to the 4. I'm not sure what you're asking here. In iOS you'd use the parameter like |
The Steering Committee voted to keep this proposal in review, to allow for further discussion on the review issue. |
@joeljfischer -san, 3 After all, if you have to worry about what your current Template is while designing it, How about the above as an alternative idea? 4 I'm asking about the downside 2 that says, |
3. I'm sorry, but I'm not understanding your point here. Of course the developer can manually set the layout themselves using an RPC / ScreenManager API, but while we could mandate that developers do that in their code, that would be a breaking change and is undesirable for other reasons. It's also unnecessary for many apps (such as MEDIA apps). 4. That sentence refers to proposed solution, so the developer would use the proposed solution as defined in the proposal. If that's not a sufficient answer for you, I'm afraid I don't understand the question. |
@joeljfischer -san, 3
For this motivation 4 |
3. I think I understand what you're saying. I think you're asking if I could add documentation to the HMI integration guides or overview guides to guarantee for certain kinds of apps what the starting template is. Can you please confirm that that is what you are asking? If so, I don't see a problem with that, but I also don't think that this is a necessarily contradictory proposal. The head unit should still confirm to the device that their assumption of what template they are on is correct. 4.
Are you asking for documentation on what an app developer would do here? Either way, this is simple and completely dependent on what the developer wants to do, and therefore is incredibly variable. Documentation is always added for new features on smartdevicelink.com in the app library guides and would be done again here. There's really nothing to document here because the developer gets the information (by simply pulling from the property) and then doing whatever they wish based on that, which can't really be documented. I strongly disagree that "skeletons" and "samples" are at all necessary for this very simple change. |
3
We believe this is one of the solutions to the problem. We expect that the problem is "The Default template may be different for each OEM, and the template may be different from what App Developer expected, so it will not be displayed correctly." Therefore, we think the above is one of the solutions. 4
Yes.
We think it is necessary to separate what the app developer wants to do and what the system must do. In this case, we don't think it's better for the app developer to have to find out how to do it and think about it. |
3.
This is incorrect. Allow me to quote from the motivation of this proposal:
The problem is that the head unit nowhere declares "this is the template being displayed," and the app library SDKs nowhere say, "this is the template being displayed." Therefore, an API is being added on both ends to have a 100% reliable mechanism to say "this is the template being displayed." Adding documentation requiring OEMs to start on certain templates based on app types is fine, but it doesn't solve the problem for already released head units and it doesn't solve the problem in the motivation. 4.
That is a request that I will not do for the reasons I already laid out in my previous comment. I believe that the problem and the solution have been described in detail and it is easily understandable.
This is an extremely simple change. The system states what the current template is in the
I'm sorry, but are you saying that the app developer shouldn't know what template is displayed? If so, then I couldn't more strongly disagree with that as an app developer myself. |
We will confirm joel-san comment and reply. |
The Steering Committee voted to keep this proposal in review, to allow for additional conversation on the review issue. |
3
Are you suggesting that this proposal is simply an improvement in reliability by adding a parameter? The motivation in this proposal states:
We recognized that it's trying to solve the problem mentioned in this statement. In other words, I would appreciate if you could clarify in the proposal whether the purpose of this proposal is to solve some problem or a proposal to simply improve. |
3. Yes, by having this parameter, we solve the problem of not knowing with 100% certainty what the current template name is because the head unit is telling us. The purpose of this proposal is to solve the problem of the app developer not knowing what the current template name is by adding the app library API, and to add an API to the window capability for the head unit to say "this is the current template name." I feel that we are going around in circles, and I have said the same thing many times, so I request that the steering committee vote on this proposal in the next meeting. |
Revisions: 1. Change the 2. Clarify that if the parameter isn't provided after it has been provided previously, it should be assumed that the template has not changed. |
3 We can agree if this proposal is incorporated into the environment or sample that the app developer is based on to avoid variability from app to app. |
The Steering Committee voted to accept this proposal with revisions. The author will update the proposal to include the revisions described in this comment. |
@joeljfischer please advise when a new PR has been entered to update the proposal to reflect the agreed upon revisions. I'll then merge the PR so the proposal is up to date, and enter issues in impacted repositories for implementation. Thanks! |
The proposal has been updated and implementation issues have been entered: |
Hello SDL community,
The review of "SDL 0321 - Add Current Template Name to Window Capabilities" begins now and runs through October 27, 2020. The proposal is available here:
https://github.com/smartdevicelink/sdl_evolution/blob/master/proposals/0321-window-capabilities-template-name.md
Reviews are an important part of the SDL evolution process. All reviews should be sent to the associated Github issue at:
#1087
What goes into a review?
The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review through constructive criticism and, eventually, determine the direction of SDL. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to answer in your review:
Please state explicitly whether you believe that the proposal should be accepted into SDL.
More information about the SDL evolution process is available at
https://github.com/smartdevicelink/sdl_evolution/blob/master/process.md
Thank you,
Theresa Lech
Program Manager - Livio
[email protected]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: