[Babase] ranker again
Karl O. Pinc
kop at meme.com
Thu Oct 5 15:04:29 EDT 2006
On 10/05/2006 12:27:53 PM, Susan Alberts wrote:
> Jun (Karl please read also and provide any feedback),
My comment is that if consistency should be enforced
then this is something that the database should do.
We should probably make this data-driven, so that
there's a "master" column (or some such name)
on RANKTYPES that indicate that one ranktype is a
"master" of another and the rankings must be
consistent with respect to the "master".
Is this a general enough approach that it's likely to accomodate
whatever sub-rankings there might be of of "ALL" or other
sorts of ranking schemes? If not then we need to talk about this
further.
The other question to consider is intervals over which ranks
are computed/in-effect. If rankings are always month-by-month
then this is not an issue. At the moment all the validation
code assumes that the ranks that are saved are computed based
on group membership that occurs during a single month --
the check that says you've got to be in the group (or
supergroup) during the month in order to be ranked.
>
> A few more thoughts about ranker after several conversations between
> Jeanne and I.
>
> Perhaps the best way to describe the hierarchical relationships
> between rank types is as follows:
>
> ALF is the "master" within-female ranking. ADF and JUF (juvenile
> females, not a currently designated rank type, but it should be) need
> to be derivable from ALF and consistency must be enforced between the
> relative rankings in each.
>
> ALM is the "master" within-male ranking. ADM and JUM (juvenile males,
> not a currently designated rank type, but it should be) need to be
> derivable from ALF and consistency must be enforced between the
> relative rankings in each.
>
> ALL is the ranking for both sexes combined. We do not want to enforce
> consistency between ALL and ALF or ALM. The within sex rank types and
> the ALL ranktype are really two different categories and there is no
> clear hierarchical relationship between them.
> At some point in the future there may be rnktypes that need to be
derived from
> ALL but this is not obvious to us at the moment, so ALL is not at the
top of a
> hierarchy in the way that ALF and ALM are.
Karl <kop at meme.com>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
More information about the Babase
mailing list