Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Define the concept of an "opaque string" #914

Open
mr-c opened this issue Oct 28, 2020 · 6 comments
Open

Define the concept of an "opaque string" #914

mr-c opened this issue Oct 28, 2020 · 6 comments
Assignees

Comments

@mr-c
Copy link
Member

mr-c commented Oct 28, 2020

@mr-c
Copy link
Member Author

mr-c commented Oct 28, 2020

My understanding is that we meant

A nonsensical value that is swapped out with a real value later in the evaluation process. Probably some sort of easy to recognize random string

@tetron can provide more context

@tetron
Copy link
Member

tetron commented Oct 28, 2020

Yes, that's basically it. The important thing is that workflow/tool expressions shouldn't try to parse it.

@tetron
Copy link
Member

tetron commented Oct 28, 2020

The purpose being to allow the runner to swap in a value late in the evaluation process, after the workflow/tool expressions have had a chance to see it.

@kinow
Copy link
Member

kinow commented May 2, 2022

Today-I-Learned about opaque data types, and opaque string.

I had a look at the Wikipedia article, and also at the text where we use “opaque”.

A nonsensical value that is swapped out with a real value later in the evaluation process. Probably some sort of easy to recognize random string

This is easy to understand while reading the rest of the text. I'll try to incorporate something similar in a PR to update where “opaque” is used as I think that's clearer (saves the reader unfamiliar with the term to have to open a link or read a footer note.)

@kinow kinow self-assigned this May 2, 2022
@kinow
Copy link
Member

kinow commented May 2, 2022

I spent some time reading more about opaque strings, and it appears to be used in specs, some programming languages, and I found this Microsoft 365 doc, this AWS doc, and this NASA doc on DOI that use the term as well.

Maybe we should leave “opaque” and “opaque string”, but clarify it somewhere else in the document? What others think? If not, maybe a replacement term could be placeholder string, always followed by a note that implementees must not rely on this value…

@mr-c
Copy link
Member Author

mr-c commented May 2, 2022

We could insert a glossary after https://www.commonwl.org/v1.2/CommandLineTool.html#Terminology and define the terms there; they can be linked back from where they are used

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants