[Nmc-wg] Merge Chaining Examples - LAST CALL

[Jeff W. Boote]

Just to be sure we are on the same page:

I interpret this to mean that merge chaining will not be used in  
messages that are part of the NMC protocol. Is that the same  
impression others got? Do we have general agreement on that?

thanks,
jeff

On Apr 15, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Jason Zurawski wrote:

> All;
>
> On the call today everyone was in agreement that merge chaining  
> examples
> do not need to be in the NMC document.  They will continue to be
> described in NM however.  If anyone disagrees, speak up now.
>
> Thanks;
>
> -jason
>
> On 4/14/10 3:07 PM, Jason Zurawski wrote:
>> Hi Roman;
>>
>> I agree.  I will add this to the agenda for tomorrow.
>>
>> -jason
>>
>> On 4/13/10 7:12 AM, Roman Lapacz wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jason&  all,
>>>
>>> I'm reading merge chaining examples in the base doc and I'm not sure
>>> that keeping partial metadata elements, which in my opinion are  
>>> useless
>>> after chaining oparation, is a good approach. I don't believe that  
>>> they
>>> might be used for any further processing. Keeping them in the  
>>> examples
>>> presenting merged structures may be confusing for a reader. I would
>>> remove them. What do you think (see examples in the attachements)?
>>>
>>> Roman
> _______________________________________________
> Nmc-wg mailing list
> Nmc-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nmc-wg