Re: [yaco-liaison-tool] Test driving the new Liaison tool

[Patrik Fältström <[e-mail]>]

Sorry for being late with reply...

On 6 sep 2010, at 21.12, Emilio A. Sanchez Lopez wrote:

> El 03/09/10 14:40, Patrik Fältström escribió:
>> Hi Henrik and others,
>> 
>> Thanks a lot for this. This looks good, but, I of course have a few questions on features I would like to have, which I understand might be in future releases:
>> 
>> 1. The ability to see the deadline in the list of liaisons, and sort on that date
> 
>   This is really easy but I would extend it as follows:
> 
>   The ability to see the deadline in the list of liaisons and the ability to sort by any displayed field.

Yes.

>   There are liaisons without deadline (the ones which have 'for information' or 'in response' purposes) so it can be a bad idea to sort the liaisons just on the deadline date.

Correct.

>> 2. The ability to for a liaison (incoming or outgoing) "link" to some other historical liaison, so that one can create a thread
> 
>   I suppose that this only have sense when the purpose of the liaison statement is 'In response'. In that case when selecting this type of purpose a list of existing liaisons could be show to select one of them.
> 
>   The requirement should be defined better. For example:
> 
>   * Any liaison statement (of any purpose) can have a pointer to any other liaison statement

I think we must start with this. Otherwise we might have to remove rules over time.

>   Or:
> 
>   * Liaison statements with purpose "In response" should have a pointer to the liaison statement it responses.

Maybe too restrictive.

>   With these restrictions:
> 
>   * Incoming liaisons can only point to outgoing liaisons.
>   * Outgoing liaisons can only point to incoming liaisons.

Maybe. Possibly.

>   Or with tighter restrictions:
> 
>   * Incoming liaisons to an IETF entity can only point to outgoing liaisons from this IETF entity.
>   * Outgoing liaisons to an SDO can only point to incoming liaisons from this SDO.
> 
>   So when presenting the liaison list to the user we can reduce its components to the necessary ones and not show the complete liaison list.

I have problems making such strict rules. The reason for that is that I do not have enough data for what must be able to link to what.

I would be happy to, at first stage, allow something to link to something else.

>> 3. See those "links" so that one can see what outgoing liaison an incoming liaison is a response to
> 
>   No problem on this.

Thanks!

   paf