This group is locked. No changes can be made to the group while it is locked.
Re: [alto] Interop test
Wendy Roome <w.roome@...>
I suggest a slightly different approach: we specify the numerical values for routingcost & hopcount. Then let each server decide whether it wants to present numerical or ordinal versions. The only requirement is that a server MUST provide a routingcost cost map, either numerical or ordinal. Servers can provide whatever additional resources they want, and clients can fetch & validate any resources they recognize.
We do not define ordinal values, but allow servers to assign whatever values they want as long as the ordering is consistent with the numerical values we specify. That is sufficient to allow a client to verify the ordinal values.
- Wendy Roome
From: Hans Seidel <hseidel@...>
Date: Tue, June 2, 2015 at 03:00
To: "Y. Richard Yang" <yry@...>
Cc: Wendy Roome <w.roome@...>, "Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]" <Lyle.T.Bertz@...>, "alto-dev@..." <alto-dev@...>, "alto@..." <alto@...>
Subject: Re: [alto] Interop test
On 29.05.2015 20:24, Y. Richard Yang wrote:
On Saturday, May 30, 2015, Wendy Roome <w.roome@...> wrote:I agree that providing both numerical and ordinal mode for the same cost metric makes little sense from a real world perspective. For the interop, I think both should be covered. Since Wendy already proposed cost maps for routingcost and hopcount in her initial mail, I suggest providing a numerical cost map for one metric and an ordinal for the other.