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

["Kinney, Michael D" <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>]

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