so... I guess... my bet would be aligning more with the JS layer ?

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:
ideally the JS API is similar to the Android/Java API...

sure to some degree there are differences, based on the underlying platform, but having it fundamentally different (e.g. Factory/IDGenerator) etc is a bit... :)

Things like that could haven been added in an overloaded ctor - perhaps we can align the API a bit more, post 1.0.0 


On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Erik Jan de Wit <edewit@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi guys,

I want to create wrappers around aerogear-js to be able to use the Aerogear from Erria. What this task comes down to is to create a java api that calls the aerogear-js api. But then I rembered seeing an example in a presentation that you kept the apis the same on all platforms. So my work is already done I just have to look at the api defined in android. The only problem is there are some differences, for instance DataManager on the js side it can be created by passing some config object, but on the android side there is a need for an IdGenerator and a StoreFactory. So what do you guys think should I stick closer to the js api and really try to create a minimal wrapper that is close to that, or should I stick with the android api and maybe use parts of Errai to implement a bridge?

Cheers,
        Erik Jan
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev



--
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf



--
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf