Stream: implementers
Topic: OperationDefinition
Richard Kavanagh (Mar 05 2018 at 13:17):
When using OperationDefinition it seems to be possible to have parameters with child "parts" that have different "use" elements.
That is you could have a "parameter" of type "IN" with a child "part" of type "OUT" - which may be useful
You can also have a "parameter" of type "out" with a child "part" of type "IN" - which does not make sense
Does this need a constraint adding?
Grahame Grieve (Mar 05 2018 at 15:19):
it doesn't make sense to have a parameter named 'in' that is an out parameter, but it does make sense at times to have the same name for a parameter that is both in and out
John Moehrke (Mar 06 2018 at 02:53):
I hope you are just using OPT-IN and OPT-OUT as example unrelated to their normal Privacy Consent meaning... As otherwise this is a very disturbing conversation given that OPT-IN and OPT-OUT are actions in their own right. They are not compound sentences.
Grahame Grieve (Mar 06 2018 at 07:36):
"out" not "opt"
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
