[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Permissions wrong?

Mike Rylander mrylander at gmail.com
Thu Jan 28 10:14:15 EST 2010

Hrm... both "depth" and "breadth", to me, require an understanding of
directed graphs.  If the intent is to make the language more accessible to
non-developers then perhaps "range" is a better choice?  That would also
avoid confusion to the developers for whom "depth" and "breadth" mean
something specific.

As for actually making the change, it would be a fairly simple patch
adjusting any labels, as I would suggest we avoid changing the code itself
-- a much bigger and more painful change with little benefit, IMO.



On Jan 28, 2010 9:54 AM, "Dan Wells" <dbw2 at calvin.edu> wrote:

Hello all,

I fully agree that "depth" as it is used in the permission setup is not a
clear word choice.  It gives the impression of working down, that is, the
"deeper" you set it, the greater your permissions, and this is not the case.
 If it is still possible and not horribly difficult to change this, I think
"breadth" is a better word choice and easier to understand, as it seems
clear that a permission breadth of 'Consortium' provides greater abilities
than a breadth of 'Library', or something similar.

My two cents,

Daniel Wells, Library Programmer Analyst dbw2 at calvin.edu
Hekman Library at Calvin College

>>> On 1/26/2010 at 5:23 PM, Victoria Bush <vbush at ilstu.edu> wrote: >
Thanks, Jason. That did the...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20100128/0e090103/attachment.htm 

More information about the Open-ils-general mailing list