Semantic Model Mail Archive: SM> FW: Suggestion for re-arran

Semantic Model Mail Archive: SM> FW: Suggestion for re-arran

SM> FW: Suggestion for re-arranging the 2 State and Description table s

From: Zehler, Peter (PZehler@crt.xerox.com)
Date: Mon Sep 30 2002 - 07:45:40 EDT

  • Next message: TAYLOR,BOB (HP-Vancouver,ex1): "RE: SM> Keyword Extension ISSUE 1"

    All,

    Does anyone have any objection to this change? I will add it to the agenda
    for this week's telecon.

    Pete

                                    Peter Zehler
                                    XEROX
                                    Xerox Architecture Center
                                    Email: PZehler@crt.xerox.com
                                    Voice: (585) 265-8755
                                    FAX: (585) 265-8871
                                    US Mail: Peter Zehler
                                            Xerox Corp.
                                            800 Phillips Rd.
                                            M/S 128-30E
                                            Webster NY, 14580-9701

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Hastings, Tom N
    > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 7:28 PM
    > To: Zehler, Peter
    > Cc: Hastings, Tom
    > Subject: Suggestion for re-arranging the 2 State and Description
    > tables
    >
    > Peter,
    >
    > I had a thought that would eliminate repeated attributes between:
    >
    > a. the Job State and Description Attributes Table and
    > b. the Document State and Descriptions Attributes Table.
    >
    > At present there are a lot of duplicates between these two table. How
    > about re-arranging these two tables into the following two tables instead:
    >
    > a. the Job and Document State Attributes Table and
    > b. the Job and Document Description Attributes Table.
    >
    > Then indicate with each attribute, whether its J, D, or J,D for Job versus
    > Document.
    >
    > It would also make these two table be consistent with
    >
    > c. the Job and Document Processing Table.
    >
    > and eliminate a lot of duplicate attributes, because a large number of
    > attributes would have both J,D. And the description would just say
    > "Job/Document".
    >
    > Also I never liked mixing State and Description attributes in the same
    > table, since they are so fundamentally different.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Tom
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 30 2002 - 07:45:53 EDT