Re: [regrep] [RS Issue] Need clarification on comment on line 1410

[Matthew MacKenzie <mattm@adobe.com>]

My argument was that maybe we didn't want to deprecate references to  
deprecated content...so I don't see how this connects.


--
Matthew MacKenzie <mattm@adobe.com>
Sr. Architect, Adobe Systems
http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/


Time is the most valuable thing a man can spend.
		-- Theophrastus
On Jan 25, 2005, at 9:55 AM, David Webber (XML) wrote:

> Matt,
>
> Google and "The-way-back" machine teach us that retaining links
> to old deprecated content can be valuable...
>
> DW
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew MacKenzie" <mattm@adobe.com>
> To: "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com>
> Cc: "Goran Zugic" <gzugic@ebxmlsoft.com>; "Farrukh Najmi"
> <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>; <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 10:12 PM
> Subject: Re: [regrep] [RS Issue] Need clarification on comment on line  
> 1410
>
>
>> Thinking in the abstract, if a target is deprecated is it also fair to
>> assume references to it are deprecated?  Possibly yes, possibly no.
>>
>> Imaginary Use case:
>>
>> User "bob" has been deprecated as part of a reorganization.  "bob" has
>> been given 3 months to transition his role to someone else ("mary"),  
>> and
>> during that three months he shall continue in his job.  If Association
>> to process objects define "bob"'s position, should those associations  
>> be
>> deprecated?  I don't think so.  Why?  Because those associations will
>> need to be transitioned to "mary".  Maybe this needs to be an optional
>> flag on the deprecate request.
>>
>> Duane Nickull wrote:
>>
>>> Goran:
>>>
>>> That probably depends on the type of reference.  If it is a reference
>>> (association) of "supercedes", it probably should not be deprecated.
>>> On the other hand, if it is a reference as "includes", that is  
>>> another
>>> matter.
>>>
>>> I guess this is a wake up call for a good set of user guides ;-)
>>>
>>> Duane
>>>
>>> Goran Zugic wrote:
>>>
>>>> I like Duane's idea as well. However, I also think that in a such
>>>> case we should also (automatically) deprecate all objects that
>>>> reference the deprecated object. For example, it doesn't make sense
>>>> to keep an Association with a "valid" status (approved) that
>>>> references a deprecated object. It raises another question related  
>>>> to
>>>> the  RS specs. What is the reason that we don't deprecate objects
>>>> that reference objects that were deprecated after their creation?
>>>
>>>
>>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster  
>> of
> the OASIS TC), go to
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/ 
> leave_workgroup.php.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster  
> of the OASIS TC), go to  
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/ 
> leave_workgroup.php.
>