On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 11:56:18AM +0200, Erich Focht wrote: > Hmmm, your WARNING looks for me like an unsafe GO decision. But it is a GO > decision. Only it has attached with it a warning message. So you are well > within the GO / NO GO pattern. > > Actually a WARNING is only necessary because the check is not precise enough > about the state of the system. If you'd have precise information about the > system, you could make a clean decision and _know_ whether this is a GO or a > NO GO. Without the warning message. (And I understand that such cases with > imprecise checks can exist).
My feeling is that a WARNING should, by default, imply NO GO. The user should then have the option to repeat the attempt with a parameter implying: "I have looked into that (specific) WARNING and have decided to proceed anyway." -- Ted Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://psg.com/~ted/ "If you don't look, you don't know." Dr. Sam Ting, Nobel laureate experimental physicist. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Oscar-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel
