Proposal to split out the "members" from coreQ (Was: Re: Philosophy of basic Q)

[Pierre Didelon]

David Berry wrote:

> 
> I know I've said it before, but there is no harm in saying it again - the
> fact that the suggested serialisation in the doc does not clearly have a
> one-to-one connection with the data model is, I think, one of the main
> problems with the doc.

totally agree!

> 
> I always thought we were way ahead of ourselves in diving into
> serialisations before we had firm agreement on the data model which we
> were supposed to be serialising!
> 

Well, speaking of data structures (data member inside class) certainly,
but concerning interfaces your point is not so straigthforward,
ans serialisation is important beacause it is, then, the only way (?sure)
to exchange "object" (quantity) as a whole, in one "transaction".

Pierre 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIDELON :@: pdidelon_at_cea.fr        Phone : 33 (0)1 69 08 58 89
CEA SACLAY - Service d'Astrophysique  91191 Gif-Sur-Yvette Cedex
--------------------------------------------------------------------------