[MOBY-dev] RFC #1863 Error Handling in MOBY-S -- Vote Called

[Martin Senger]

> I think we can still vote today, as far as Martin's objections are not 
> really about the proposal itself, but about the aesthetics and 
> presentation of the proposal
>
   No, I disagree. The proposal is correct in the spirit, but incorrect or
unclear in details (which I named in my email). The only aesthetics part
was about the format. That on its own would not give me right to suggest
to postpone the vote.

> Explanations would not make the document *more* difficult to understand 
>
   well the document has about ten pages; but it introduces only few XML
tags, plus a page of error codes; I think that having it more consice
helps to make sure that we are not overlooking some missing or
contradicting point.

> See, we can choose between PDF, RTF, ASCI text, HTML, OpenOffice 
> format...
>
   As I said, this was not my major concern. So do as you wish. I would
probably prefer an ASCII, or HTML - because that's how the rest of Biomoby
API is written now.

> concerned about using open or closed tools, OMG publishes specifications 
> in Word format
>
   Talking about OMG, it is even worse that you think. The submissions
must be in FrameMaker which is completely close format. This is a
long-time living issue on the OMG table... But that's not our cup of tea.

> Anyway I don't have access to the bugzilla
>
   My personal opinion: don't even try - it's easy to be lost there. I did
not find how to vote there anyway.

> Do you have any specific proposal here?
>
   I just wanted to have the codes explained. The last version I saw (the
one from bugzilla) still has the client codes there. And I do not
understand what they mean.

> Added a new optional Notes element under serviceNotes to separate human 
> readable free text from structured XML mobyException. This way we can 
> maintain old functionality into serviceNotes. API changes proposed too.
>
   How can I see the new version?
 
> Added a new section with API changes needed. Your question was answered 
> in the proposal which is in the bugzilla but in short yes, still an 
> empty result has to be sent
>
   But that was under-documented from the beginning. Because the API does
not say what an "empty integer" means. I hoped that we will use this
chnage to clarify this.

> Hope that you change your mind. As soon as you tell me which document 
> format you want, I'll send the latest version with the changes commented 
> above.
> 
   Please send it. I will try to read it as it arrives - (but it's already
close to midnight here so I do not know if I manage it :-)).

   Regards,
   Martin

-- 
Martin Senger
   email: martin.senger at gmail.com
   skype: martinsenger
consulting for:
   International Rice Research Institute
   Biometrics and Bioinformatics Unit
   DAPO BOX 7777, Metro Manila
   Philippines, phone: +63-2-580-5600 (ext.2324)