> about a 'deleted' marker on the VERSIONED_OBJECT<T> type itself.
That seems a clever idea. Because the whole version history would become out of sight. That is how it is used anyway. It is also like that in Github. If a file (object) is deleted from the repository it seems like completely vanished. Also all previous versions of the object. Of course going back in time makes it again visible and also the previous versions. Op vr 3 nov. 2017 13:50 schreef Thomas Beale <[email protected]>: > It's potentially not a completely wrong idea: it might be worth thinking > about a 'deleted' marker on the VERSIONED_OBJECT<T> type itself. As i > noted before though, i'd like to get a better idea of real scenarios > where the current model of deletion doesn't work properly before doing > anything. > > - thomas > > > On 03/11/2017 02:36, Bert Verhees wrote: > > > > In a versioned system there is no status for "deleted" necessary > > *inside* a composition. The system itself marks the composition > > deleted. With this in mind it seems to me the semantical meaning of > > the inside "deleted" status is meant for something else. > > > > Bert > > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
