Okay "sync" it is. I went through this when naming the original query options. Tree is a bit specific to the deployment and reservation since it could be a chain :-) Recursive might be better, but let me thing about it. On 2013-01-28, at 9:42 AM, Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj@nordu.net> wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, John MacAuley wrote:
THe agreement out of our last meeting was to introduce the querySynch() command to support a synchronous (blocking) summary query command. This operation would not support the detailed query behaviours.
To maintain consistency in operation naming, I would like to break the current asynchronous query operation into two separate commands: query() that would provide the asynchronous summary query for the schedule, and queryDetails() that would provide the recursive tree view of the schedule.
Sounds good. The structure in the reply is a bit odd.
I am open for naming changes as well. If someone thinks querySummary() and querySummarySynch() are better operation names.
I'm okay with the Summary name. However I think that usually one abbreviates synchronous as "sync", without the h. I also find the queryDetails name a bit misleading, as it doesn't really reflect the nature of the request. Maybe queryTree/treeQuery or queryRecursive?
Best regards, Henrik
Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net> Software Developer, NORDUnet
_______________________________________________ nsi-wg mailing list nsi-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg