devicemap-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Werner Keil <>
Subject Re: How to get the DDRSimpleAPI source code? (was: Does the build work?)
Date Fri, 09 Jan 2015 14:06:39 GMT
Unfortunately it's not that simple at least for builders (a file which even
classifier can't do without at the moment)
Class references like
control builder "injection" very much like e.g. Spring does, so the file
referenced by the properties used by W3C ServiceFactory has to be a valid
class name, otherwise it makes no sense and the W3C implementation can't
instantiate any builders.

However, that's the nice thing being highly modular, I don't think we had
to "factor out" builders and some other modules, since they contain
absolutely no reference to W3C DDR.
import org.apache.devicemap.simpleddr.builder.Builder;
import org.apache.devicemap.simpleddr.model.UserAgent;
import org.apache.devicemap.simpleddr.model.browser.Browser;
//NO org.w3c here;-)
public class DefaultBrowserBuilder implements Builder {
This Builder pattern was introduced and applied by OpenDDR and donated to
DeviceMap. So a W3C implementation could use not only data but also these
builders from DeviceMap without breaking the current data file. Should
builders no longer be part of a 2.x data format, then either a wrapper like
Reza drafted (all of that refers to W3C, it's a minimalistic approach to
mainly the "model" package and a few other classes in the Simple DDR
module) could be compatible with a new data file or builders defined
outside Aapache in a separate XML definition. As mentioned, the DI
mechanism for Builders could in future be redesigned to use a DI framework
like CDI/DeltaSpike, Spring or Guice.


On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <>

> Hi,
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Werner Keil <> wrote:
> > ...Thus something like let's call it "" that does not fall
> under
> > Apache requirements could use "devicemap-data" and "w3c.jar" together
> > without problems?...
> Yes no problem, if you guys do this outside of DeviceMap you can do
> whatever, as long as the project and package names are different from
> this project to avoid confusion.
> That doesn't prevent collaborating on data collection, structure and
> tests here and you wouldn't have to comply with Apache requirements on
> that project, which probably makes things easier.
> -Bertrand

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message