Dear all, Thank you to everyone for responding! The results of the vote are:
Numerical------ 2 (David and Nisha) Strings-------- 3 (Gary, Dick and Maximilian) Abstained------ 3 (Alexios, Karsten and myself) So strings it is! Again, many thanks for participating. Best wishes, Sebastian On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 03:09:43PM +0100, Sebastian Crane wrote: > Dear all, > > Today we continued our discussion on the format of Enumeration values (such as > hash type or relationship type) in the Canonical Serialisation for SPDX 3.0. > The > conclusion was that either numbers or strings could be assigned uniquely and > thus could be adequately defined as unambiguous. > > Human-readability would be slightly increased with strings, and compactness > would be slightly improved when using numbers, but neither of these is a core > goal of the Canonical Serialisation. Therefore we decided to simply call a > vote > and go with whatever people have a preference for! > > Please vote by responding to this email before Saturday whether you would > prefer > a string representation of Enumeration types or a numerical representation of > Enumeration types. Note that the result of the vote does not apply to any > other > serialisation formats of SPDX - merely the Canonical Serialisation. > > Thank you! :) > > Best wishes, > > Sebastian -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#4624): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/4624 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/91965044/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
