Re: [nm-wg] immediate future of current schemas

[Dan Gunter <dkgunter@lbl.gov>]

Tanya Brethour wrote:
> > I agree although I guess it is possible that similar tests are done at
> > similar times. A unique ID would make sure the requester picks up the
> > results from the test that they requested. I acknowledge that is a
> > flimsy excuse. 
> > On the other hand, does it hurt to assign a unique ID? It could be
> > optional when requesting the result. This should work as long as the
> > requested test result is put in the database along with everything else.
> >
> > I will want to keep track of who is making the requests, but that is
> > probably a separate issue.
> >
> > I would very much like to say "come back later". Having the client hang
> > for possibly minutes seems wrong. Is an identifier your only objection?
>
> No it doesn't hurt to assign an ID. I can see your point about it making 
> retrieving results slightly easier.... but thats still debatable ;)
>
> As long as this functionality is optional.. then I have no real
> objections (meaning, I can use identifier=0 and not ever worry
> about it). 
> -Tanya
I agree that it should be optional, both in the requirements and XML syntax.

-Dan