CDR Tickets

Issue Number 1253
Summary Investigate making common schema elements for InScopeProtocol and CTGovProtocol indexing
Created 2004-07-06 16:30:55
Issue Type Improvement
Submitted By alan
Assigned To alan
Status Closed
Resolved 2012-04-02 11:28:45
Resolution Won't Fix
Path /home/bkline/backups/jira/ocecdr/issue.105581
Description

BZISSUE::1252
BZDATETIME::2004-07-06 16:30:55
BZCREATOR::Alan Meyer
BZASSIGNEE::Alan Meyer
BZQACONTACT::Lakshmi Grama

InScopeProtocol and CTGovProtocol currently have parallel schema definitions for
a number of elements including status values and indexing criteria. The new
CTGovProtocol terminology change software will be designed to assume that these
elements have equivalent definitions - which enables a common user interface to
work on both, and provides a reasonable expectation of equivalent outcomes when
global changes are run on both.

It might be a good idea to modify the schemas in one way or another to guarantee
that the two document types have the same structures in these areas. Some other
InScopeProtocol and CTGovProtocol structures may also be common and benefit from
this investigation. Having a guarantee of this type will prevent a future
developer from inadvertently changing one without changing the other.

Comment entered 2004-07-14 15:14:35 by Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]

BZDATETIME::2004-07-14 15:14:35
BZCOMMENTOR::Bob Kline
BZCOMMENT::1

Reassigning to Alan.

Comment entered 2004-07-15 18:14:34 by alan

BZDATETIME::2004-07-15 18:14:34
BZCOMMENTOR::Alan Meyer
BZCOMMENT::2

This had been assigned to Bob by default because his name was associated with
schema changes. But the task is more properly mine.

Comment entered 2010-10-01 10:43:19 by Englisch, Volker (NIH/NCI) [C]

BZDATETIME::2010-10-01 10:43:19
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::3

Isn't this a task that should actually be closed? It's not seen any activity in 6 years and I doubt it fits the new reality.

Comment entered 2012-01-03 11:01:44 by Englisch, Volker (NIH/NCI) [C]

BZDATETIME::2012-01-03 11:01:44
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::4

Alan, you created this issue so I'll let you make the decision if we should keep this poor fella trapped in the P10 pit for another 5 years or just release it to the freedom of closed items.

I'm voting for freedom.

Comment entered 2012-01-03 11:13:04 by alan

BZDATETIME::2012-01-03 11:13:04
BZCOMMENTOR::Alan Meyer
BZCOMMENT::5

It's still not a bad idea to do this, but I'm not sure it will never be a high enough priority to make it worthwhile. There's other refactoring that would probably be less painful and more useful - or maybe just more useful.

I'll close it.

Comment entered 2012-01-03 11:14:10 by alan

BZDATETIME::2012-01-03 11:14:10
BZCOMMENTOR::Alan Meyer
BZCOMMENT::6

Closing issue. See previous three comments.

Comment entered 2012-04-02 11:28:45 by Englisch, Volker (NIH/NCI) [C]

BZDATETIME::2012-04-02 11:28:45
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::7

Closing issue (so that it falls off the 'P10 issues still open'-report.

Elapsed: 0:00:00.001350