Next in thread →
Next in month →
Re: [obix] My pre-meeting comments, with some post-meeting notes
That's ok and I wouldnt change it - I
was thinking of the code to process. Is there a precedence? if you
have formal revision string then retrieval time is pretty much
irrelevant; if you don't then retrieval time is needed to clarify.
Happy with either as described.
Thanks!
bill
--
William Cox
Email:
Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
+1 862 485 3696 mobile
+1 908 277 3460 fax
On 9/18/14 1:50 PM, Considine, Toby wrote:
My
understanding, as a conformance issue, is that it is
mandatory to have at least one (formal rev or retrieval
time) but optional to have both.
tc
“The
single biggest problem in communication is the illusion
that it has taken place.”
–
George Bernard Shaw.
Toby
Considine
TC9, Inc
OASIS
TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar
OASIS
TC Editor: EMIX, Energy Interoperation
SGIP
Smart Grid Architecture Committee
Email:
Phone: (919)619-2104
http://www.tcnine.com
blog: http://www.NewDaedalus.com
From:
[mailto:]
On Behalf Of Gemmill, Craig
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 1:45 PM
To: William Cox; Obix TC List
Subject: RE: [obix] My pre-meeting comments, with
some post-meeting notes
Bill-
On
your comment about line 769, it looks as though you are
suggesting that the retrieval time be included EVEN IF the
version information is also available. This is different
than my understanding of our intent, which was retrievalDate
exists ONLY if version info is NOT available.
Just
throwing this out for others to weigh in.
Craig
From:
[mailto:]
On Behalf Of William Cox
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 12:15 PM
To: Obix TC List
Subject: [obix] My pre-meeting comments, with
some post-meeting notes
Attached to this message as .rtf.
Thanks!
bill
--
William Cox
Email:
Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
+1 862 485 3696 mobile
Next in thread →
Next in month →