Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - included in UDK code but not part of the spec

Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - included in UDK code but not part of the spec

[Boaz Kahana]

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

Re: Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - included in UDK code but not part of the spec

[Gao, Liming]

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 change, we don't change its definition. But for any new introduced protocol, we will insist on this rule without EFI_ prefix. 

Thanks
Liming
> -----Original Message-----
> From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
> 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

Re: Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - included in UDK code but not part of the spec

[Tim Lewis]

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 <Boaz_Kahana@Phoenix.com>; 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 change, we don't change its definition. But for any new introduced protocol, we will insist on this rule without EFI_ prefix. 

Thanks
Liming
> -----Original Message-----
> From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of 
> 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

Re: Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - included in UDK code but not part of the spec

[Kinney, Michael D]

Tim,

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.

The rule that should be followed for new Protocols/PPIs/GUIDs that are part of the 
EDK II implementation is to prefix with EDKII_.

Thanks,

Mike


> -----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 <liming.gao@intel.com>; Boaz Kahana <Boaz_Kahana@Phoenix.com>; 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 <Boaz_Kahana@Phoenix.com>; 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 change, we don't
> change its definition. But for any new introduced protocol, we will insist on this
> rule without EFI_ prefix.
> 
> Thanks
> Liming
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
> > 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

Re: Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL - included in UDK code but not part of the spec

[Gao, Liming]

Agree. The patch has been sent. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kinney, Michael D
> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 12:26 AM
> To: Tim Lewis <tim.lewis@insyde.com>; Gao, Liming <liming.gao@intel.com>;
> Boaz Kahana <Boaz_Kahana@Phoenix.com>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org;
> Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: Protocol EFI_FORM_BROWSER_EXTENSION_PROTOCOL -
> included in UDK code but not part of the spec
> 
> Tim,
> 
> 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.
> 
> The rule that should be followed for new Protocols/PPIs/GUIDs that are part
> of the
> EDK II implementation is to prefix with EDKII_.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> > -----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 <liming.gao@intel.com>; Boaz Kahana
> <Boaz_Kahana@Phoenix.com>; 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 <Boaz_Kahana@Phoenix.com>; 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 change, we
> don't
> > change its definition. But for any new introduced protocol, we will insist on
> this
> > rule without EFI_ prefix.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Liming
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
> > > 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