[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xmile] Very rough draft of section 5: Display and interface structure
Hi Bobby, I read Billy's reply to mean that there should be a defined set of shapes supported, and not an allowance for anything possible. You raise the more difficult question of how much, and in what manner, do we restrict the allowed shapes. For example, we could say that <stock> can only show up with a Rectangle shape, <rate> has to be a valve of some form, and <aux> can be nothing, a circle or a diamond. I think that captures the bulk of diagrams that would be recognizable as System Dynamics work, unless the model uses smooths or delays. (Something like a=SMTH1(b,t) is really a level and ought to be allowed a box - but would be an <aux> given the language definition.) I personally, especially because of the last issue, lean toward making the form of _expression_ flexible and depending on either the implementation, or the model creator, to use that flexibility judiciously. I worry that getting to prescriptive about diagram form (to accommodate smooths and whatnot) will unnecessarily complicate the spec and any conforming implementations. I also don't want a spec that needs to be extended to be at all useable by many implementations. I think we are allowed in the spec to issue guidelines on the appropriate way to use that flexibility, and this is the most effective way to discourage the creation of hobgoblin looking models. I think this is a good topic for further discussion on Thursday. Bob Eberlein On 10/8/2013 12:29 PM, Bobby Powers
wrote:
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]