OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep-cc-review message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [regrep-cc-review] Association Core Components - Represent with Associations

Thanks Mark. I'd be genuinely interested to learn more about why you
feel it would be confusing, and to who - Implementers? Users? Readers of
a Technical Note describing technique #2?


"CRAWFORD, Mark" wrote:
> Joe,
> It might get rather confusing to try approach 2.  Better to keep separate mechanisms - especially in light of the corresponding ASBIEs.
> Mark
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
>         Sent: Fri 7/11/2003 7:38 AM
>         To: CCRev
>         Cc:
>         Subject: [regrep-cc-review] Association Core Components - Represent with Associations
>         Team,
>         Over the weekend I'll send an updated summary on our proposed handling
>         of each of the CCTS requirements.
>         I've been thinking more about Association Core Components - particularly
>         the example on CCTS p.12. In that example, we have:
>         - An ACC called "Address. Details", with several BCCs (ex: Address.
>         Street. Text)
>         - An ACC called "Person. Details", with several BCCs (ex: Person. Name.
>         Text)
>         - 2 ASCCs, each of which associate the "Address. Details" ACC with the
>         "Person. Details" ACC - and each of which provide a different "role" for
>         the "Address. Details" ACC within the "Person. Details" ACC. These are
>         reprsented as "Residence" and "Official Address" in the example.
>         - Also: When each ASCC is created, each BCC within the "Address.
>         Details" ACC "takes on" the role signified by the ASCC within the
>         "parent" ACC. For example, the BCC of "Address. Street. Text" becomes
>         "Person. Residence. Address".
>         Having said that: It seems to me that there are generally 2 ways to
>         handle the "transformation" described in the final point above:
>         (1) Create a new BCC in the Registry for each "pre-transformation" BCC
>         that has the same metadata as the pre-transformation BCC (except for its
>         name) - and give it a new name (i.e. "Person. Residence. Address").
>         That is, we would create a BCC called "Person. Residence. Address" that
>         would essentially be a copy of the "Address. Street. Text" BCC, with a
>         different name. Seems very redundant and inefficient, and a waste of
>         Registry storage space.
>         (2) Do not create a new BCC in the Registry, but use the Association
>         mechanism of the Registry to "point to" the pre-transformation BCC and
>         indicate the new name within the Association. This prevents the need to
>         duplicate BCCs in the Registry and keep them in sync if the metadata for
>         either of them changes.
>         I would like to propose that we pursue (2) - and represent the ASCC by
>         an Association between the 2 ACCs. We can add a slot to the Association
>         to indicate the new Object Class for the ASCC - i.e. the Object Class of
>         "Address" for the "Address. Details" ACC would be "qualified" by the new
>         Object Class Qualifier of "Residence" for the ASCC (the combination of
>         Object Class Qualifier and Object Class would therefore be
>         "ResidenceAddress"). When tools join the two ACCs through the ASCC, they
>         can ensure that they "construct" the name for the ASCC using:
>         - The Object Class for the "master" ACC (i.e. "Person")
>         - The Object Class Qualifier for the ASCC (i.e. "Residence")
>         - The Object Class for the "joined" ACC (i.e. "Address")
>         ...to yield "Person. Residence. Address". So a large part of this would
>         be up to the tools that ultimately utilize these entities, and we can
>         place some requirements in our Technical Note that instruct the tools
>         how to access the entities.
>         Thoughts, comments?
>         Joe
tel;work:(703) 902-6923
org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team
adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012;
title:Senior Consultant
fn:Joseph M. Chiusano

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]