Running up to the ROS 1.0 release, we try to purge as much of
std_msgs/std_srvs as possible.  std_msgs was whittled down to (mostly)
just 1-to-1 mappings of the primitives, and std_srvs was whittled down
to the Empty service.

My preference would be to keep it this way, though this does not
forbid a commonly-used services ontology elsewhere.

That said, one of the reasons we purged so many services is that its
hard to have semantically meaningful common services.  Services are
more equivalent to method declarations, so a 'GetBool' service is
similar to naming a method or interface, 'GetBool'. There are cases
where such a method is reasonable, but it doesn't provide any higher
level semantic other than the type signature.

 - Ken

On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Ivan Dryanovski
<ivan.dryanovski@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are there plans (or at least, sufficient interest) to expand the
> current std_srvs package with more services? It currently only
> supports an "Empty" service. I'm building some interfaces, and I end
> up using several services over and over, such as basic
> accessors/mutators:
>
> * SetBool / GetBool
> * SetString / GetString
> * SetFloat / GetFloat
> * Increment
> * Decrement
>
> etc
>
> I can always define them in my own package, but having them in a
> central place will make it easier to write interfaces that are
> compatible with each other.
>
> Ivan
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users@code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users