Gary Winiger wrote: >> "In the course of reviewing or documenting interfaces, the situation >> often occurs that an attribute will be present which may be inferred to >> be an interface, but actually is not. A couple of common examples of >> this are output from CLIs intended only for human consumption and the >> exact layout of a GUI." >> >> The project team is happy to adjust the classification level to what is >> appropriate and customary. Please advise. >> > > IMO, it depends. Do you wish to declare the output to be > a programming interface? Or is the output meant as "human > readable." If a programming interface, how about Uncommitted? > If to be processed by humans, N-a-I. I read your initial posting > as N-a-I. > All of the interfaces are intended to be human readable and not programming interfaces.
> Gary.. > >> Cindi >> >> Joseph Kowalski wrote: >> >>> Gary Winiger wrote: >>> >>>>> 4.4. Interfaces: >>>>> fmadm command-line options are Evolving, human-readable output is >>>>> Unstable. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Hummm, how about Committed and Not-an-Interface respectively? >>>> >>>> >>> Not clear... Maybe they intended this to be Unstable/Uncommitted. Guys? >>> >>> - jek3 >>> >>>
