[Nsi-wg] Query renaming

[John MacAuley]

Okay "sync" it is.

I went through this when naming the original query options.  Tree is a bit specific to the deployment and reservation since it could be a chain :-)

Recursive might be better, but let me thing about it.

On 2013-01-28, at 9:42 AM, Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, John MacAuley wrote:
> 
>> THe agreement out of our last meeting was to introduce the querySynch() command to support a synchronous (blocking) summary query command. This operation would not support the detailed query behaviours.
>> 
>> To maintain consistency in operation naming, I would like to break the current asynchronous query operation into two separate commands: query() that would provide the asynchronous summary query for the schedule, and queryDetails() that would provide the recursive tree view of the schedule.
> 
> Sounds good. The structure in the reply is a bit odd.
> 
>> I am open for naming changes as well.  If someone thinks querySummary() and querySummarySynch() are better operation names.
> 
> I'm okay with the Summary name. However I think that usually one abbreviates synchronous as "sync", without the h. I also find the queryDetails name a bit misleading, as it doesn't really reflect the nature of the request. Maybe queryTree/treeQuery or queryRecursive?
> 
> 
>    Best regards, Henrik
> 
> Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net>
> Software Developer, NORDUnet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nsi-wg mailing list
> nsi-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg