This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Datatypes R2 Issue 62"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
== Discussion == | == Discussion == | ||
| − | + | Lloyd: When sending an address over the wire, you need to express what the address represents. In some cases, it's not a physical address or postal address, it's intended for searching. | |
== Links == | == Links == | ||
Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]] | Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]] | ||
Revision as of 02:51, 17 April 2007
Data Types Issue 66: AD.use PHON+SRCH
Introduction
Add PHON and SRCH as use codes to the AD data type (akin to AD). Addresses and names are most commonly used (in potentially a phonetical fashion) to identify a person.
? backward compatible.
There is no use-case for 'storing' names/addresses with a SRCH use-code, as it is query specific.
- In other words, SRCH is no longer a desirable feature for AD. A "flag" to indicate that something is SRCH should not be part of the datatype spec, but should be solved in a different manner.
- Also see Datatypes R2 Issue 56
Discussion
Lloyd: When sending an address over the wire, you need to express what the address represents. In some cases, it's not a physical address or postal address, it's intended for searching.
Links
Back to Data Types R2 issues
