[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] Classification of View_definition_context
I
don't necessarily disagree.
However, playing the role of a devil's advocate
(occaisonally), I would suggest that this approach has a number of possible
flaws;
0. the
solution below is potentially ambiguous since the same information is present in
more than 1 place (redudancy?) & people tend to use the most simple
approach when faced with simple/complex route to the same answer. (e.g. people
may just read the attr vals instead of going to the RDL). Placing the values in
the VDC adds no value if you still have to traverse the RDL to achieve the
same.
1. the
assumption is that all systems are capable of reasoning through/over an RDL (to
identify class super types)
2. the
assumption that everyone has access to the same RDL, RDL version
etc.,
Most
of which can be overcome in various ways within the context of exchange
partners/scenarios and more software. Though how do we ensure each user's
software navigates the RDL in the same way - or perhaps these would be free
utilities provided by the RDL manager?
In
fact, all other things aside, I think the atttribute classification is the
best solution since it clearly identifies both the external_class and the
attribute being classified. Using this method is unambiguous without the need
(or s/w) to be able to traverse across a RDL (in addition to the lookup).
However, I'd remove the values from the VDC instance for the same reasons
stated above.
Of separate, wider concern I think, is that what
used to be part of the AP standard is now shifting to the realm of an RDL (which
I wouldn't necessarily disagree with), but which raises it's own questions about
how the RDL is standardised and managed. Again this can be overcome within the
context of exchange partners, but raises the doubt of accuracy across
distributed systems that may not have access to the same RDL, or how the
evolving nature of an RDL is to be reconciled with the need for Long Term Data
Retention/Archiving for future use of exchange files. I guess when the RDL
is complete it will also be archived with the exchange files, along with all the
software since owl may not be still around in 20 years time.
kind
regards,
Tim
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]