From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE6C41A1F25 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Sep 2016 19:08:30 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,376,1470726000"; d="scan'208";a="12026624" Received: from fmsmsx105.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.203]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Sep 2016 19:08:30 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx152.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.5) by FMSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:08:25 -0700 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.70) by FMSMSX152.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:08:24 -0700 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.15]) by SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.101]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 10:08:22 +0800 From: "Gao, Liming" To: "Kinney, Michael D" , Tim Lewis , Boaz Kahana , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" Thread-Topic: Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - included in UDK code but not part of the spec Thread-Index: AdIPsLF3tuc7Fe+1RouBAK+2myvhewECxgMQABlxMDAAAJAXoAAUlt6Q Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 02:08:21 +0000 Message-ID: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14B47B926@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <60b0bbecb9a64ffc9dfb1f1947c9b75f@SCL-EXCHMB-13.phoenix.com> <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14B47B0B2@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <7236196A5DF6C040855A6D96F556A53F3EEF30@msmail.insydesw.com.tw> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - included in UDK code but not part of the spec X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 02:08:31 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Agree. The patch has been sent.=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Kinney, Michael D > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 12:26 AM > To: Tim Lewis ; Gao, Liming ; > Boaz Kahana ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org; > Kinney, Michael D > Subject: RE: Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - > included in UDK code but not part of the spec >=20 > Tim, >=20 > That is a good idea. We should also add a comment block for that typedef= to > explain why > the EFI_ name is provided for compatibility. >=20 > The rule that should be followed for new Protocols/PPIs/GUIDs that are pa= rt > of the > EDK II implementation is to prefix with EDKII_. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Mike >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of > Tim Lewis > > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 9:03 AM > > To: Gao, Liming ; Boaz Kahana > ; edk2- > > devel@lists.01.org > > Subject: Re: [edk2] Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL > - included in UDK > > code but not part of the spec > > > > Liming -- > > > > Could you change the protocol name, and then use a typedef with the old > name for > > compatibility? > > > > Tim > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of > Gao, Liming > > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:57 PM > > To: Boaz Kahana ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org > > Subject: Re: [edk2] Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL > - included in UDK > > code but not part of the spec > > > > Boaz: > > This protocol is edk2 implement protocol. We have no plan to propose = it to > UEFI > > spec. Its EFI_ prefix is history reason. To avoid the incompatible chan= ge, we > don't > > change its definition. But for any new introduced protocol, we will ins= ist on > this > > rule without EFI_ prefix. > > > > Thanks > > Liming > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf O= f > > > Boaz Kahana > > > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 8:25 AM > > > To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org > > > Subject: [edk2] Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - > > > included in UDK code but not part of the spec > > > > > > The protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL is defined in > > > MdeModulePkg\Include\Protocol\FormBrowserEx.h with EFI_ prefix > > > although it is not part of the UEFI spec. > > > (It was added by Intel - Liming - in Sep 2011) > > > > > > IMHO it should be added to the UEFI spec otherwise it should not use > > > the EFI_ prefix. > > > > > > Boaz > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > edk2-devel mailing list > > > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel > > _______________________________________________ > > edk2-devel mailing list > > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel > > _______________________________________________ > > edk2-devel mailing list > > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel