[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: Multiple fingerprints
Makes sense k From: Larry Golding (Comcast) [mailto:larrygolding@comcast.net]
Ok, let’s leave it as an object. Yekaterina, if you just need a sequence, you can use property names
"1",
"2", … Larry From: Michael Fanning <Michael.Fanning@microsoft.com>
instanceGuid is an option value that is an opaque guid identifier that in no way derives from a result’s data. A fingerprint is an identifier that derives from the data associated with a result which is intended to be stable (or as stable
as possible). The argument for making result.fingerprints an object would be the same as the rationale for partial fingerprints: a stable key name providers some way to correlate ids produced by a specific fingerprint-generating algorithm run-over-run. From: Larry Golding (Comcast) <larrygolding@comcast.net>
Thanks Yekaterina. Yes, result.id (or, as we propose to rename it in Issue #159,
result.instanceGuid) is optional (MAY be present). Michael et. al., any thoughts on scenarios that would require
result.fingerprints to be an object rather than an array? Larry From: O'Neil, Yekaterina Tsipenyuk <katrina@microfocus.com>
Hi there, I think an array should be sufficient. I also want to double check that
result.id is optional because we don’t generate separate ids — the fingerprints are our ids. K
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]