[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [ebXML-Registry] Rename "RegistryObject" and "RegistryEntry" and othercomments on RIM
Since we are doing a makeover of RIM, I propose that we rename these two classes to mean what they really are (we should know what they really are by now, after all the discussions?) I have had difficulty explaining these concepts to others and not wonder at the same time where these names crept from:-) I do claim innocent of all prior associations with these names in ebXML Registry. Now that I do not sound too defensive, here is my proposal: RegistryObject contains metadata that describes each entity stored or referenced in the registry, relationships among these entities. If indeed this is the case, let us rename "RegistryObject" to "RegistryMetaData" or something else that has "MetaData" explicitly. [Actually: I would have separated the notion of the "description of the entity" from "description of the relationships among entities" in the interest of cleaner design - the former can exist by itself, whereas the later cannot exist without the former. Once I have these I would have simply associated them. I suspect, what got us here is that the lifecycle concept, since it applies to both these notions, made us simplify the classes further. I would have captured this notion as a separate base class, and made both classes inherit from it] RegistryEntry contains "extended metadata," where metadata seems the same as before. Why not call it "RefgistryExtendedMetaData" - quite a mouthful, I agree. OK, I suspect there was much discussion on this topic before, so this must be some can of worms. Don't be surprised if I keep my peace for a while on this, just because of that. Regards, -Suresh
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC