Archiving annotations (was: [Biococoa-dev] Annotation)

[Charles PARNOT]

At 8:39 AM -0500 2/23/05, John Timmer wrote:
>I had a thought on handling the attributes last night.  One of the 
>dangers of allowing everything into an attribute is that cruft can 
>build up and the file size balloon, especially if a single sequence 
>is shuffled between applications.  It would be nice to have a 
>formalized way of ensuring that a minimal, informative sequence 
>object can be created.  So, I suggest that we code for three levels 
>of information:
>
>Base level:  minimum necessary to hold an attribute:  name, type, 
>range, notes.  Everything else is removed.  Guaranteed to work in 
>any BC-based app.
>App level: All objects are tested to determine whether the current 
>application has the class to work with is kept; everything else is 
>removed.
>Verbose level:  everything's there, whether it can be used or not.
>
>This way, information that's been copied, dragged and dropped, etc. 
>can easily be streamlined in a way that's more appropriate for the 
>receiving app.
>
>JT


>At 5:43 PM +0100 2/23/05, Alexander Griekspoor wrote:
>>This scheme to save objects to disk is perfect. I like the 
>>additional BOOL 'shouldArchive'.
>This should perhaps be integrated with John's proposal on the three 
>archiving options, more on this later...

John's idea is indeed excellent!
One thing to keep in mind is if a file is used in 2 different apps, 
back and forth, then the user would probably not want to lose 
everything every time she switches from one app to the other and save.

charles

-- 
Help science go fast forward:
http://cmgm.stanford.edu/~cparnot/xgrid-stanford/

Charles Parnot
charles.parnot at stanford.edu

Room  B157 in Beckman Center
279, Campus Drive
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305 (USA)

Tel +1 650 725 7754
Fax +1 650 725 8021
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.bioinformatics.org/pipermail/biococoa-dev/attachments/20050223/3cd7fa11/attachment.html>