Difference between revisions of "Talk:PubMan Func Spec History of affiliations"
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
There seem to be the following types of predecessor: replacement, fusion, spin-off, splitting. | There seem to be the following types of predecessor: replacement, fusion, spin-off, splitting. | ||
[[User:Frank|Frank]] 09:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC) | [[User:Frank|Frank]] 09:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
: it sure sounds like it: | |||
* An OU(1) has one direct successor OU(2) and not exists anymore in reality (i.e. is closed). The OU(1) is set in status closed (replacement). | |||
* An OU is founded as fusion from two or more other OUs (fusion). The new OU has multiple predecessors. | |||
* A part of an OU(1) is created as spin-off. The OU(1) exists (i.e. is not closed) beside the new OU(2) (spin-off). | |||
* An OU(1) is split-up into multiple new OUs (OU(3), OU(4), …) and has therefore multiple successors. OU(1) not exist in reality any longer and is therefore set to status ‘closed’. (splitting) | |||
of course the state to infer the type of change from would have to be timestamped, and either e.g. the closing for a replacement would have to happen at the same time or before creating the replacement. but i still think inference would be better than risking data getting out-of-sync because the user inserts a type of change not matching the actual state.--[[User:Robert|Robert]] 09:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:23, 31 March 2009
from the definition it seems as if the type of change can readily be inferred from the actual untyped successor/predecessor relations - so it seems redundant.--Robert 10:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Do you really think that can be inferred? That would be great! There seem to be the following types of predecessor: replacement, fusion, spin-off, splitting. Frank 09:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- it sure sounds like it:
* An OU(1) has one direct successor OU(2) and not exists anymore in reality (i.e. is closed). The OU(1) is set in status closed (replacement). * An OU is founded as fusion from two or more other OUs (fusion). The new OU has multiple predecessors. * A part of an OU(1) is created as spin-off. The OU(1) exists (i.e. is not closed) beside the new OU(2) (spin-off). * An OU(1) is split-up into multiple new OUs (OU(3), OU(4), …) and has therefore multiple successors. OU(1) not exist in reality any longer and is therefore set to status ‘closed’. (splitting)
of course the state to infer the type of change from would have to be timestamped, and either e.g. the closing for a replacement would have to happen at the same time or before creating the replacement. but i still think inference would be better than risking data getting out-of-sync because the user inserts a type of change not matching the actual state.--Robert 09:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)