Re: Splitting off the member extraction algorithm in a separate report?

Hi Pieter,

This sounds like a good idea.
The member extraction has grown in complexity in recent iterations so splitting it up can make it more accessible.

Does this imply we’d be refactoring and/or renaming the libraries related to member extraction to be more self-sufficient?

Kind Regards,
Konstantin (he, him, his)


> On 1 Feb 2024, at 10:22, Pieter Colpaert <pieter.colpaert@ugent.be> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I’ve received some comments when pitching the member extraction algorithm that this report should probably be a separate report from the main TREE specification, as the algorithm itself is useful beyond TREE.
> 
> What are your thoughts on that? It would entail giving the member extraction algorithm its own repository and spec document.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Pieter
> 
> -- 
> https://pietercolpaert.be
> +32486747122
> 
>