-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Standardize inputs and measures across sub-controls #12
Comments
That is a good summary of the problem at hand. For the proposal, I would recommend the following:
The rationale for these suggestions:
Ideally we would have a document writing system that uses variables so one change would also change all the references, but currently, I'm not sure which system that would be. |
Good comments @apiperCIS, and I tend to agree with that approach. Then:
|
2nd bullet should call them "Global Measures", not "local inputs" |
Thanks, @wmunyan, you're correct. Fixed here:
|
I would suggest dropping the dash within the concatenation specification and just leave the designator with the dot as a field separator. |
@Tonyknz, good suggestion, thank you. |
Problem
In the specification, each Sub-Control contains a set of Inputs and a set of Measures. Inputs are presented as ordered lists, so that the specification can reference them as "Input
x
". Measures are denoted asMx
, wherex
is a positive integer. Input and measure labels are effectively reset for each Sub-Control. For example, the input ordered list at the beginning of each Sub-Control resets to begin numbering at1
, andM1
exists across all Sub-Controls. In the case of the measures, more often than not similarly labeled measures carry different meaning.From time to time, the same inputs and measures may be used across Sub-Controls. For example:
M3 = Count of endpoints (from Input 1)
, where Input 1 is the "List of endpoints"M7 = Count of endpoints from Input 1
, where Input 1 is the "Endpoint Inventory"In the above example, the inputs for Sub-Controls 3.1 and 4.8 are synonymous, but clearly not expressed using the same language. While "list of endpoints" is intended to be equivalent to "endpoint inventory", the specification needs to use the same language.
It then follows that
M3
of Sub-Control 3.1 andM7
of Sub-Control 4.8 are clearly the same measure.The fact that same inputs and same measures are referenced differently across Sub-Controls makes implementation more challenging.
Proposal
The specification may benefit from standardizing inputs and measures across Sub-Controls using variables.
Input variables may be denoted by
Ix
, wherex
is a positive integer starting with1
for the first input of the first Sub-Control, and will be incremented by one for each new input across Sub-Controls.Measure variables may be denoted by
Mx
wherex
is a positive integer starting with1
for the first measure of the first Sub-Control, and will be incremented by one for each new measure across Sub-Controls.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: