jasig-ssp IRC Logs-2013-06-13

[12:42:15 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> there is a critter in my fire place, I am going to be AFK for a bit to take care of it

[12:42:28 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> it's Ed, isn't it

[13:06:12 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> best conversation ever Me: 'I need someone to help me with a raccoon trapped in my chimney', them: 'well we have an appointment open next week'

[13:06:58 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> raccoons are well known to be quite patient

[13:07:11 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> this one is not happy at all

[13:07:18 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> do you have enough raccoon food to keep him alive for a week until they get there?

[13:07:28 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> by the screams I can only guess he is watching reruns of charles in charge

[13:08:00 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> cant wait for the smell

[13:08:24 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> i'd like to get this guy out alive but I also want to keep my 10 fingers and stay rabies free

[13:08:58 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> if it's screaming, it's likely injured

[13:09:31 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> yeah, it probably fell down, did not even realize I did not have a chimney cap

[13:10:10 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> i will be making that call in about 10 minutes

[13:10:24 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> my wife's response to this is classic: 'I'll be at the mall'

[13:12:37 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> it's better to kill it in the chimney and keep your fingers

[13:18:45 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> back at my keyboard, looks like its going to be stuck in there until I can get someone in here

[13:20:15 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> at least you'll get a free hat out of it

[13:25:44 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> hooray, got someone to come later in this afternoon

[13:27:28 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> We have a guy around here called the "Critter Gitter". Beyond the spelling being wonderful, he makes sure the animals are placed in a peaceful environment so they can live a worry-free life after capture

[13:36:56 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> yeah aparently these guys are hard to get a hold off, I'd settle for anyone silly enough to stick their hand in there

[13:37:14 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> I didn't have this problem in brooklyn

[13:37:55 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> ppppssshhh. I'd do it in a second. I hate raccoons.

[13:38:24 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> im not that brave, i am a city slicker

[13:41:50 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> It's not so much bravery, more malice toward the species. I'd have it's head on a staff, Lord of the Flies style, on my roof as a warning to any other. That's me though. I'm barely hanging on to 51% sanity.

[13:49:56 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> now there is a visual

[14:40:51 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> Hey Jason for the MAP Plan Status filter

[14:41:13 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> how should that behave when students do not have active plans

[14:41:32 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> should they not show up if they have no active plans?

[14:43:34 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> hmmm…. technically you could have a plan status in the db without an active plan

[14:44:07 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> there is a bit of a gap because the on/off plan external data

[14:44:15 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> does not line up to a specific map instance

[14:44:37 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> so if we assume that the on/off external data field only applies to active plans

[14:44:58 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> the filter also implies it will only return students with only active plans

[14:46:07 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> that's a little tricky. logically, that is exactly how it should work. since we don't know how the school will determine on and off plan, we may not be able to assume that logic.

[14:46:22 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> it is the safest play

[14:47:16 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> also

[14:47:30 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> the other gap (maybe small) would be that the plan status would be stale (maybe only overnight) and the advisors could be working with the plan during the day.

[14:47:36 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> should the value on/off plan apply to the value of the active plan, or the value in external data?

[14:48:17 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> there's only one status value, external data

[14:48:28 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> oh, i thought there was a new field for plan

[14:48:41 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> might be wrong

[14:49:11 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> checking

[14:49:20 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> I don't think so. JS will need to weigh in. I didn't think there would be any kind of sync from external to plan data. and we definitely don't have them writing to plan data.

[14:51:48 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> yep your right

[14:51:48 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum54> the original idea was no new operational field for on/off plan

[14:52:02 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> so the way the query would work for that filter is it

[14:53:27 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> all would return all students with active plans

[14:53:45 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> On would return active plans with external data saying on plan

[14:53:48 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> and off for off

[14:54:02 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> that sounds ok?

[14:55:44 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> I'm having a little trouble assuming the connection between active and on plan status. I agree logically that it should be that way, and it is a little safeguard. But, I'm a little concerned about limiting results.

[14:56:17 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> the spec says active plans

[14:56:42 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> MAP Plan Status

[14:56:43 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> • Definition: The status of the active plan for students

[14:58:36 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> thinking it through, we may not be able to assume it

[14:58:40 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> if we don't consider plan status

[14:58:44 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> or sorry

[14:58:52 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> if we dont consider active plans in respect to plan status

[14:58:58 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> it may be useful to also add that as a filter

[14:59:03 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> because otherwise

[14:59:08 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> there is no other way to filter on students with maps

[14:59:10 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> was just typing that

[14:59:37 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> so run with that then?

[14:59:59 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> they could essentially do that same by combo'ing the plan status (on and off) and plan type (active or other)

[15:00:25 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> well I'd ask this

[15:00:42 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> would you care about students without active maps

[15:00:45 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> if you use that filter?

[15:01:07 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> if the answer is yes

[15:01:16 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> I Think two filters would be good

[15:01:53 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> two is safest

[15:02:03 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> yup

[15:02:10 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> cool

[15:02:23 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> then I could find a student that says on plan but doesn't have an active plan

[15:02:44 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> right

[15:02:48 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> which would be a population that I need to work on

[15:02:50 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> that could be useful for operational reasons

[15:03:18 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum541> sorry if this was answered already, but also wondering about the proposed semantics of "all"…

[15:03:20 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> what do we call that? plan type?

[15:03:38 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> On/off plan

[15:03:48 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> as a label

[15:03:52 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> no?

[15:04:03 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> plan status: on and of plan, do we have a name for active and not active?

[15:04:32 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum541> it's status in the database

[15:05:33 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum541> they're both status in the db… object_status and planning_status

[15:06:56 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> on the phone with patty

[15:06:59 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> one min

[15:07:27 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum541> anyway… while you think on that… for "all"… the last comment on that, when we still had one field was "all would return all students with active plans"

[15:07:39 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum541> which implies a distinction between "any" and "all"

[15:08:16 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum541> was that the intention?

[15:08:50 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum541> i.e. "ignore this filter" vs "has to have at least a non-null value for this filter"

[15:09:41 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> the intent was either on or off. mismatches in the specs between any and all

[15:10:03 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> so the list would be Any, On and Off

[15:10:25 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> but they could have nothing, which I assumed any would include but it wouldn't be listed in the choice

[15:11:14 CDT(-0500)] <dmccallum541> ok, that was my follow-up. "does 'any' include 'no status'?" i read your answer as "yes"

[15:11:58 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> yeah

[15:18:11 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> Maybe go with MAP Status (on and off plan) and Plan Status (active and inactive)

[15:29:57 CDT(-0500)] <TonyUnicon> ok

[15:35:32 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> I updated the specs

[15:46:52 CDT(-0500)] <js70> I'll weigh in now about 185

[17:27:28 CDT(-0500)] <JasonElwood> "Mama used to chase raccoons off the porch with a broom"