How is a Segment (Dynamics for Marketing) different from Marketing List (Dynamics for Sales)?
Is Marketing List for Campaign same as Segment for Customer Journey?
Are their purpose any different Marketing List for Campaign and Segment for Customer Journey?
The important differences:
You can always add members to/remove members from a marketing list, while you can't modify static segment once it is live
Marketing list "live" inside CDS (SQL) - i.e. it is subject to SDK limitation like any other entity and performance implications
Segments "live" in cloud, so they're not subject to SDK limitation (i.e. way better performance, no issues when running big campaign)
Marketing list can be used for contacts subscription/unsubscription while segments can't
Segments can be used to process both interactions (i.e. things like clicking an email link, submitting a form, or registering for an event) and profiles, while marketing list can process just profiles
Over all I understand your confusion - its just a matter of providing static segment similar capabilities marketing list have (i.e. subscription/unsubscription).
You can post it as an idea here: https://experience.dynamics.com/ideas/list/?forum=dfa5b83d-9e4c-e811-a956-000d3a1bef07
Disclaimer: I work in Microsoft Dynamics Marketing as a developer, and this is "how I feel about this", not official statement of any kind.
Scenario:
20 development teams
each team responsible for multiple microservices
microservice ownership is fluid; teams might trade microservices, teams might drop or add microservices
team identification is important for tools and organization
The teams cannot be named by the feature they are working on, because it will be multiple features, and feature needs change. Naming teams by numbers or letters doesn't feel correct, because it implies order or sequence.
How does one name the teams? If you were a developer on one of these teams, how would you want your team identified?
You can't have names that are both meaningful and meaningless - i.e. they help identify something organizationally but will still make sense when the organization changes.
I recommend meaningless: animals, astronomical objects, or other vague code words. That way you can record them on lists as needed but people can also use them to form mental associations. Think of what "Amazon" and "NewEgg" mean even though they don't actually mean those things.
I'm trying to sort alphanumeric using unpack command in Ruby but it doesn't work my and I don't know how to solve this.
This is my list:
accidentally
accommodation
accompany
according to
account
account for
accurate
accurately
accuse
achieve
achievement
acid
acknowledge
a couple
acquire
across
act
action
active
actively
activity
actor
actress
actual
actually
ad
adapt
add
addition
additional
add on
address
add up
add up to
adequate
adequately
adjust
admiration
admire
admit
adopt
adult
advance
advanced
advantage
adventure
advert
advertise
advertisement
advertising
advice
advise
affair
affect
affection
afford
afraid
after
afternoon
afterwards
again
against
age
aged
agency
agent
aggressive
ago
agree
agreement
ahead
aid
aim
air
aircraft
airport
alarm
alarmed
a
abandon
abandoned
ability
able
about
above
abroad
absence
absent
absolute
absolutely
absorb
abuse
abuse
academic
accent
accept
acceptable
access
accident
accidental
I use this command:
ruby -e 'array = File.read("lista").lines ;sum= Hash.new(0); m5g= array.sort_by { |l| +l.split(";")[0].unpack("B*")[0].to_i }.join("");print m5g' >fsssfff3
And I obtain this:
a
ad
act
add
age
ago
aid
aim
air
able
acid
aged
about
above
abuse
abuse
actor
adapt
admit
adopt
adult
after
again
agent
agree
ahead
alarm
abroad
absent
absorb
accent
accept
access
accuse
across
action
active
actual
add on
add up
adjust
admire
advert
advice
advise
affair
affect
afford
afraid
agency
abandon
ability
absence
account
achieve
acquire
actress
address
advance
against
airport
alarmed
a couple
absolute
academic
accident
accurate
actively
activity
actually
addition
adequate
advanced
aircraft
abandoned
accompany
add up to
advantage
adventure
advertise
affection
afternoon
agreement
absolutely
acceptable
accidental
accurately
additional
adequately
admiration
afterwards
aggressive
account for
achievement
acknowledge
advertising
accidentally
according to
accommodation
advertisement
Is it possible to use another unpack decodification .unpack('B*') for doing this?
Is there any difference between HL7 USA and UK standards ? If its there then what are those ?
I'm not aware of any country-specific HL7 features neither did Google query site:hl7.org country specific reveal something eye striking. But it does not mean there are no differences
I guess your best bet would be to narrow your question down to a particular set of messages, register as member at hl7.org and ask this question through their internal mailing list (Even better best bet might be to talk to some friendly competitor and ask for the lessons learned)
In our country-specific HL7 community the membership is also paid, but the benefits of becoming a member are close to 0 from the developer's perspective. It's prestigious to be a member and it looks good on the business card. But all you get is access to downloadable specifications (but most of them are free for about a year anyway)
In the software I was working with we were exchanging only very small set of hl7 messages, namely: ADT^A04, ADT^A05, ADT^A08, ADT^A18, ADT^A23, ADT^A34, ORM^O01 and ACK in 2 different countries, considering adding 3rd country, without any country-specific features needed, except the convention used for identifying patient with his/her security number. The number format was country-specific but it was handled by upper software layers. The topmost customization was the number input mask and user input validation business rules at GUI level
What we did need, was an installation-specific or 3rd-party-system-specific message customization. For this customization you'll need rather the list of vendors of hardware and software your system will talk to. Once you have it, check their hl7 conformance statements
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I currently work in a small business (15-20 employees, 5 programmers) where most projects are custom built CMS and a few web applications products.
Since I started working there, I have worked on many projects, but specifications for each project vary a lot. Sometimes we get a little detail, a Word document telling what the client wants, and what we are suggesting (suggested form fields, a short description of display, etc.). Sometimes almost nothing except "do what you think is the best approach for this project/module/request".
My question to you guys, who might work in different kind of businesses, is: How (huge pile of paper? Word docs? Visios?) and what kind of information do you get from your superiors, managers, teamates when starting a project (plenty of analysis, drawings, etc.)? How much detail do you get on this?
Hope my question is clear enough, thank you.
Specs..that's kind of funny...how about never :(.
Seriously a lot of companies assume specs aren't needed, its absolutely unacceptable but this is how it is in a LOT of companies. They assume a one liner and the programmer knows what the program should do, the inputs / outputs and so on.
Unfortunately in my case I have to actually help write the specs..and Im the programmer :(.
I mostly get a lot of verbal direction and I use a voice recorder to record the conversation and transcribe it when I am done. I write my own specs from my customers' words.
Then, as a good consultant should, I take the writeup back to the customer and verify it, and get a signature and build it, and they live happily every after! (no they dont, they change their mind a 100 times)
It can vary depending on what group the work falls under:
Support request - If the change will take a short period of time and is fixing something broken, there is this group. This could be as simple as, "Add Bob to the list of authorized users for that ancient form" where the form is something written years ago and aside from adding and removing users, it isn't touched for fear of breaking things.
Service Advisory Committee request - Items that are up to a few days are in this group as these are kind of like mini-projects as the request may be to create a new form or portal for a group. This could be upgrading some 3rd party software where we have some customizations that make the upgrade not necessarily a simple thing for Operations to do.
Project - In this case there are usually a few Word documents and/or e-mail threads that help nail down requirements in terms of scope, budget, and time. These can take months though there is something to be said for having a prototype to change rather than creating the initial prototype to tell if requirements are really met or not. Course my current project is over a year old, still has a few more months to the timeline and already has a successor coming after it is done,i.e. there is a Phase II to go after Phase I.
Uber project - These merit their own group of documentation and are the million dollar, multiple company projects that usually try to document everything up front rarely works out well here. Thus, there is some adoptioon of agile for these but there are still some growing pains to go through as how we use agile matures. Think installing a dozen modules of some off-the-shelf software that requires both internal and external developers to customize the suite for our specific needs as the software is supposed to be very robust, flexible and help save lots of time and money on how people otherwise do their jobs generally. Think ERP or CRM for a couple of examples here.
We are a 16-person company that creates and supports customized software for small retail shop owners.
The projects we get fall into three general categories (as related to specs):
"Here, automate this form." A sales person explains that our customer only wants this form to appear where they can fill it out and print it to make it look professional to their customer. Our specs is a single piece of paper that looks something like an order form or report. This is always false; they want pop-up lookups, automatic updating from other sources, and "while you're at it" add-ons that more than double the time. These, we've learned to just live in the moment and let the project take its course. By the time we're done, the program doesn't look anything like their original form.
Small changes. Like a simple e-mail explaining that the background color is stale, or a request to sort a report by a different column. These, we just do as time allows.
Big company integrations, where we're tasked with making our software work with some big outfit like Intuit (QuickBook) or FedEx (shipping rates). These often have well thought out documentation and sample code. We get 100's of pages in word documents or pdfs. The problem with these is when their specs are wrong. We find out about inaccuracies when we try to test or certify our integration. In these instances, we usually take longer in certification than we did to originally develop the processes.
In all cases, the real trouble is when a sales person promises a solution to the customer before even asking a programmer what it would take. As recently as 2 weeks ago, a sales person got into real trouble and had to issue a refund (that person is no longer with the company).
None - at least not from management.
Instead, as a developer (and particularly one leading a software project right now), I'm expected to contact my users/customers/etc and work directly with them to come up with our specifications and requirements. The documentation I do request from my team is only what will be useful to the team. I am lucky in that management rarely requests a document that doesn't make sense or won't provide some use to our project.
I currently have a half-dozen or so specs each 60-80 pages. One of them is 80 pages with no table of contents. Good times.
Our Product Managers and senior engineers prepare three planning docs for our data management software projects.
High-level requirements: 1-to-3 sentence descriptions of hardware/software supported or specific feature for this project. (10-15 pages of Excel-like grids)
Technical details: Engineering implementation of each high-level requirements. Up to a page for each, depending on amount of detail. (30-40 pages of filled-in feature details)
Business agreement: Summary of 1 & 2 with engineering schedule and Product Mgmt's market analysis. Everyone signs off on this. (5 pages analysis, 20 technical)
I haven't seen work flows or other Visio-like details in our specs. The prioritized requirements and schedule prove critical, so we understand when to lop things off to save development and testing time.