Issue 3546: Ambiguous wording in section 2.2.10 (biomolecular-ftf) Source: Japan Biological Informatics Consortium (Mr. Martin Senger, martin.senger@gmail.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: 2.2.10 says "An AnalysisInstance object must offer...the EventChannel to which it publishes its analysis events and the last event that occurred..." The wording seems to me ambiguous. I guess that an AnalysisInstance offer the last event, not the EventChannel - so the last event should be under separate bullet. Suggestion: to split the bullet into two, and also reiterate that the EventChannel can be null (as stated in 2.2.7). Resolution: accepted Revised Text: Split the third bullet in 2.2.10 into the EventChannel, which may be null, to which it publishes its analysis events; the last event that occurred; Actions taken: April 11, 2000: received issue May 24, 2001: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 19:53:32 +0100 (GMT) From: Martin Senger To: Juergen Boldt cc: biomolecular-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: several possible "issues" In-Reply-To: <38F2C7F5.518CB9A3@netgenics.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-UIDL: 2(#"!EOS!!7j5e9_~"e9 Juergen, Here are some issues we are discussing in the FTF. I think that they are ready to be issued as issues :-). Could you please do it? Most of them are just changes in the spec document and I do not know if they should be separated or sent together. I am refering to the lifesci/99-12-01. ----- 2.2.10 says "An AnalysisInstance object must offer...the EventChannel to which it publishes its analysis events and the last event that occurred..." The wording seems to me ambiguous. I guess that an AnalysisInstance offer the last event, not the EventChannel - so the last event should be under separate bullet. Suggestion: to split the bullet into two, and also reiterate that the EventChannel can be null (as stated in 2.2.7). Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:21:40 -0700 From: Scott Markel Organization: NetGenics, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: BSA FTF Subject: [OMG-BSA] proposed resolutions for some issues Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: W9!e9QLE!!'Okd9>SPe9 In accordance with the consensus at last week's FTF meeting, here are the proposed resolutions for the issues that were considered straightforward. Note that as some multi-issue issues are split apart, some of those may also fall into this category. I'm not reproducing the entire text of the individual issues. You can find that at http://cgi.omg.org/issues/biomolecular-ftf.html. Issues can be reported online at http://www.omg.org/technology/issuesform.htm. This message is *not* a vote. I just want to make sure these particular issues are as straightforward as some of us thought last week. Please let me know if you disagree. Actually it would be nice to know if you agree, too. :) If there's been no response by early next week (Philip is out until then), I'll send out a message kicking off a vote. If there are responses, hopefully we'll get the resolutions resolved and still vote on these issues next week. Scott Issue 3546: Ambiguous wording in section 2.2.10 Resolution: Split the third bullet in 2.2.10 into * the EventChannel, which may be null, to which it publishes its analysis events; * the last event that occurred; -