RE: [Issue-34] quality issue

Hi Arle,

It certainly should be an optional attribute.
As for the values: I'm not sure we want to attach a specific meaning to them.

Something like locQualityissueEnabled='yes' (default) or 'no' would work. (enabled or active?)

Assuming an item is not enabled/active because it is resolved may not be true. On could choose to disable temporarily item for various reasons (and delete the resolved ones).

-yves


-----Original Message-----
From: Arle Lommel [mailto:arle.lommel@dfki.de] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 5:15 PM
To: Multilingual Web LT Public List Public List
Subject: Re: [Issue-34] quality issue

Yves,

I think it was simply lost along the way. I thing this is an important aspect for audit trails. You don't want to just delete the error markup since then other processes cannot gain any insight into what was done. So I think that having this would be a big help and it would be easy to implement. It would be an optional attribute in the quality issue category with a default value of "unresolved" (or whatever the equivalent we choose is).

-Arle

On 2012 Oct 15, at 21:39 , Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote:

> Hi Arle, Phil, all,
> 
> I know this issue 34 is closed, but I'm using it as a way to sort this email in the right category.
> 
> I need a refresher:
> 
> At some point we discussed the possibility of an attribute that would indicate whether the given issue was "on/active" or "off/disabled". Did we 'officially' drop it? Or did it just go missing in the multiple re-designs of the data category?
> 
> Thanks,
> -yves
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2012 16:11:11 UTC