Jack Schwartz wrote: > Hi Ethan. > > Derived profiles have the capability of doing what I had proposed with > my multi-level file scheme (that I proposed in my email of Monday > 5/11). Whereas my file scheme would have specially marked fields in > file A pointing to data in file B, derived profiles would have > specially marked fields in file A which would refer to a method > (somewhere) which just returned the data that would have been in file B.
That's not necessarily how derived profiles would work; it could, but not necessarily. What you're describing sounds more like an offshoot of the the feature in jumpstart profiles where known keywords in a profile get replaced dynamically at client runtime with whatever those known keywords are defined to equate to. What problem does the multi-level input data file scheme solve? -ethan > > We could even make an optimization, similar to what I do for my XML > default setting,. In the default setting, we can specify a "hardwired > value" or a method to calculate a value. In the above example, the > "data in file B" would be a "hardwired value". Both derived profiles > and XML default setting can calculate dynamically-determined data as > well. > > Thanks, > Jack
