Re: Tin Man Design Question 2 - to vote Jan. 9th?

[Carmelo Montanez <carmelo@nist.gov>]

HI All:

    I think first method is preferable as it is easier to manipulate the
data if the
whole path is already there.  Makes it easier to change as well.  Unless
there are some serious objections, I think that's the way to go.

Carmelo

----- Original Message -----
From: <David_Marston@lotus.com>
To: <xslt-conformance@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 3:13 PM
Subject: Tin Man Design Question 2 - to vote Jan. 9th?


> Here is one of the issues identified in my message titled
> "Test Case Markup & Cataloging, Tin Man edition" that I sent
> to this list on 12/1/2000:
> 2. How to represent the file hierarchy in Title, Identifier,
>    Source
>
> DISCUSSION:
> This is an issue for the software that would be reading the
> catalog data and attempting to create file paths. The
> question is whether to require the harness to concatenate
> strings (and thus know the separator character). One approach
> says that Identifier, the element that contains whatever path
> there is, is complete: it begins with Title (highest level
> directory of this submitter's tests) and goes all the way
> down to Source (name of this test case). Another approach is
> to have Identifier only contain the part between Title and
> Source, avoiding duplication of the name.
>
> I think we should ask Tony/Carmelo if they have an opinion,
> discuss generally, move one style and vote.
> .................David Marston
>
>