List Info

Thread: Renumbering assertions
Renumbering assertions
country flaguser name
United States		 2007-02-22 18:50:03 

  


  

    





Arthur,



 



Today in the WG call we discussed whether we should renumber
the assertions as we had planned to do.  Some assertions use a 4-digit number
and others use a 7-digit number which includes a locator code.  Presumably they
should all move toward the 7 digit code (though beyond indicating which part of
the spec the assertion is found in the extra digits don’t prove that
useful – one can take the assertion number and use it as a fragment
identifier against the spec to locate the corresponding text.)



 



We however weren̵7;t able to solicit a volunteer to do
this work, which is fairly substantial when one considers that any assertion number
change needs to simultaneously be changed throughout the test suite metadata. 
I even reluctantly volunteered if the WG expressed a strong desire to normalize

these identifiers.  It didn’;t.




 



John did offer to try to fit in some work along this line,
but first perhaps it would be good to see how motivated you are to have
consistent assertion identifiers.  Are you motivated enough to do some
significant editorial work?



 



Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com




 



 






  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    Re: Renumbering assertions
  


  

     country flaguser name
United States		
     2007-02-23 06:20:56
  


  

    

  


  

    

Jonathan,



I'll do the renumbering. I want to preserve
the old numbers too so we can provide mapping help for implementors and
the test suite. I'll do this on the weekend.




The 7-digit numbering scheme was introduced
to minimize conflicts when we had the team currently working on many sections
of the spec. I'll cut it back down to 4 digits which should be plenty.
I'll reserve the first digit to indicate the spec Part (1 or 2). That leaves
999 slots in each spec.




I'll also clean up any outstanding ed
actions this weekend, My new projects are preventing me from attending

calls lately but I am highly motivated to finish the ed work on the spec
and move it to PR. What is our schedule?



Arthur Ryman,

IBM Software Group, Rational Division




blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/

phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077


assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411


fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920


mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063fido.ca










"Jonathan Marsh";
<jonathanwso2.com&gt; 

02/22/2007 07:50 PM








To

Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBMIBMCA, "'John
Kaputin (gmail)'&quot; <jakaputingmail.com&gt;




cc

"'www-ws-desc'&quot; <www-ws-descw3.org>




Subject


Renumbering assertions

















Arthur,

 

Today in the WG call we discussed whether
we should renumber the assertions as we had planned to do.  Some assertions
use a 4-digit number and others use a 7-digit number which includes a locator
code.  Presumably they should all move toward the 7 digit code (though
beyond indicating which part of the spec the assertion is found in the
extra digits don’t prove that useful – one can take the assertion number
and use it as a fragment identifier against the spec to locate the corresponding
text.)

 

We however weren̵7;t able to solicit a volunteer

to do this work, which is fairly substantial when one considers that any
assertion number change needs to simultaneously be changed throughout the
test suite metadata.  I even reluctantly volunteered if the WG expressed

a strong desire to normalize these identifiers.  It didn’;t.

 

John did offer to try to fit in some work
along this line, but first perhaps it would be good to see how motivated

you are to have consistent assertion identifiers.  Are you motivated

enough to do some significant editorial work?

 

Jonathan Marsh
- http://www.wso2.com
- http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com

 

 


  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    RE: Renumbering assertions
  


  

     country flaguser name
United States		
     2007-02-23 10:16:36
  


  

    

  


  

    





The schedule is, if we can complete the
small amount of editorial work remaining (renumbering assertions would be the
biggest part of it), get LocationTemplate-2G working and regenerate WSO2ß à Canon message testing
results, and close the last few issues, we’ll be ready to go the PR.  I217;d
like that vote to occur next Thursday, but active discussion about what to
encode still continues&#8230;



 





















From: Arthur Ryman
[mailto:rymanca.ibm.com] 

Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007
4:21 AM

To: Jonathan
 Marsh

Cc: 'John Kaputin (gmail)';

'www-ws-desc'

Subject: Re: Renumbering
assertions






 





Jonathan, 



I'll
do the renumbering. I want to preserve the old numbers too so we can provide
mapping help for implementors and the test suite. I'll do this on the weekend.




The
7-digit numbering scheme was introduced to minimize conflicts when we had the
team currently working on many sections of the spec. I'll cut it back down to 4
digits which should be plenty. I'll reserve the first digit to indicate the
spec Part (1 or 2). That leaves 999 slots in each spec. 



I'll
also clean up any outstanding ed actions this weekend, My new projects are
preventing me from attending calls lately but I am highly motivated to finish
the ed work on the spec and move it to PR. What is our schedule? 



Arthur Ryman,

IBM Software Group, Rational Division




blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/

phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077


assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411


fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920


mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063fido.ca 









 

  
  
"Jonathan
   Marsh&quot; <jonathanwso2.com&gt; 

  
02/22/2007 07:50 PM 

  		
  
  

   

    
    
To

    		
    
    
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBMIBMCA, "'John
    Kaputin (gmail)'&quot; <jakaputingmail.com&gt; 

    		
   

   

    
    
cc

    		
    
    
"'www-ws-desc'&quot;
    <www-ws-descw3.org> 

    		
   

   

    
    
Subject

    		
    
    
Renumbering assertions

    		
   

  

  
 

  

   

    
    
 

    		
    
    
 

    		
   

  

  

  		
 











Arthur, 

 


Today
in the WG call we discussed whether we should renumber the assertions as we had
planned to do.  Some assertions use a 4-digit number and others use a
7-digit number which includes a locator code.  Presumably they should all
move toward the 7 digit code (though beyond indicating which part of the spec
the assertion is found in the extra digits don’t prove that useful
&#8211; one can take the assertion number and use it as a fragment identifier
against the spec to locate the corresponding text.) 

 


We
however weren̵7;t able to solicit a volunteer to do this work, which is
fairly substantial when one considers that any assertion number change needs to
simultaneously be changed throughout the test suite metadata.  I even
reluctantly volunteered if the WG expressed a strong desire to normalize these
identifiers.  It didn’;t. 

 


John
did offer to try to fit in some work along this line, but first perhaps it
would be good to see how motivated you are to have consistent assertion

identifiers.  Are you motivated enough to do some significant editorial

work? 

 


Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com 

  

  









  

  
  
   
     
    






 [1-3]











   
 





about | contact  Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )