[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] selects and templates
|
See below
Regards -------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
Rob,
there was a discussion about documenting the contents of the select type lists some time ago. The decision then was not to document these (within the capabilities) because the benefit of having the lists were outweighed by the length of some of the lists and the fact that many lists overlap in the contents of the types provided. This would also not help readabililty of the information in my view. [RBN] I recall the debate … the issue as I remember was including the select population on the diagrams which made them unreadable. You have a point though as illustrated by my example.
In addition to the selects being available through the ap239 schema, the supporting tools should also expose the select type lists - particularly G.Instance.
Also, when you say the select lists can be auto-generated, does this mean that the xsl will take longer to process & generate the template/capability/concept views? The xsl already takes a fair while in my view which would be made worse by this especially if where more than one select type is present (e.g. within a capability where several may be present, or within a DEX where many may be present). [RBN] I don't think that this would add significantly to the processing – we would drag the select population from the long form rather than building them dynamically. I agree that the XSL is slow … however, that is only an issue for development. The publication is the derived HTML. Personally I always build the HTML and browse that. To do this you need to install ant, then cd dexlib/utils/dex ant all
ant help will give you the other ant targets that are available
I may be missing something, but at present I don't see the reason to do it - are there other reasons for doing this?. [RBN] The main reason why it was suggested was to make it easier for the reader to see what something could be assigned to.
Perhaps an html link to the (populated) select type list in the ap239 schema would be enough? [RBN] This would have to link to the long form as the selects are only populated there.
regards, Tim
From:
Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com] Hi A number of the templates use selects in the input parameters. Typically the assigning templates where the select details the things to which the assignments are made. For example: assigning_identification has an input parameter "items", which is the select identification_item This states all entities that can be assigned an identification.
We were thinking that it would be useful if population of the select was exposed in the template.
This could be automatically generated by the XSL.
E.g something like:
items(Type= 'SELECT (identification_item)' ) The items to which the identification is assigned NOTE: The identification_item is a list of the following alternate data types: Activity, Activity_method, Activity_method_realization, Activity_method_realization_relationship, Activity_method_relationship, Activity_property, Address, Affected_items_assignment, Applied_activity_assignment, Applied_activity_method_assignment, Applied_state_assignment, Applied_state_definition_assignment, Approval, Approval_status, Assigned_property, Attachment_slot, Attachment_slot_definition, Attachment_slot_version, Breakdown, Breakdown_element, Breakdown_element_definition, Breakdown_element_version, Breakdown_version, Certification, Condition, Condition_evaluation, Contract, Defined_state_relationship, Descriptive_document_property, Digital_document_definition, Digital_file, Directed_activity, Document, Document_assignment, Document_version, Effectivity, Event, Experience_instance, Experience_type, External_class_library, Hardcopy, Independent_property, Independent_property_relationship, Information_right, Information_usage_right, Interface_connection, Interface_connector, Interface_connector_as_planned, Interface_connector_as_realized, Interface_connector_definition, Interface_connector_design, Interface_connector_occurrence, Interface_connector_version, Interface_definition_connection, Interface_specification, Interface_specification_definition, Interface_specification_version, Item_shape, Justification, Justification_assignment, Justification_relationship, Justification_support_assignment, Location, Location_representation, Managed_resource, Market, Message, Numerical_document_property, Observation, Observation_consequence, Organization, Organization_or_person_in_organization_assignment, Organization_type, Organizational_location_identification, Part, Part_version , Part_view_definition, Person, Person_in_organization, Person_or_organization_or_person_in_organization_in_position, Person_or_organization_or_person_in_organization_in_position_relationship, Physical_document_definition, Position, Position_group, Probability_distribution, Product_as_individual, Product_as_individual_version, Product_as_individual_view, Product_as_planned , Product_as_realized, Product_concept, Product_configuration, Product_group , Product_group_membership, Product_group_relationship, Product_relationship , Project, Qualification_assignment, Qualification_type, Required_resource, Required_resource_relationship, Requirement, Requirement_assignment, Requirement_collection_relationship, Requirement_source, Requirement_version , Requirement_version_relationship, Requirement_view_definition, Resource_as_realized, Resource_event, Resource_item, Resource_property, Security_classification, Security_classification_assignment, Shape_element_relationship, State, State_assertion, State_assessment, State_definition, State_definition_relationship, State_relationship, Task_element, Task_element_relationship, Task_element_state_relationship, Task_method, Task_method_assignment, Task_method_relationship, Task_method_state_relationship, Task_method_version, Task_method_version_assignment, Task_method_version_relationship, Task_objective, Task_objective_state_relationship, Tracing_relationship, Type_of_person, View_definition_relationship, Work_order, Work_output, Work_request
What do people think? Regards -------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED*** The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC Group. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]