Re: [sbml-comp] Comp models with L3v2

[Chris M. <my...@ec...>]

Agreed. My preference would be that the top level model should always have the highest level/version.  I agree this would be much simpler.  However, this would make it invalid to include subModels of later levels/versions.  If people don’t think this is too strict a requirement, I’m perfectly okay with this simplifying requirement.

Chris

> On May 18, 2016, at 2:37 AM, Sarah Keating <ske...@ca...> wrote:
> 
>> Namely, it is akin to “the flattened model should be valid rule” where the target of flattening must be a model at the highest level/version of any model included.
> 
> But generally the model to be flattened is the top level model; I 
> suspect it would be much more complex if the flattened model had to 
> revise its level and version based on what external models it encountered.
> 
> Sarah
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
> bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
> restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
> apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
> _______________________________________________
> sbml-comp mailing list
> sbm...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbml-comp