Re: [regrep] [regrep - RIM draft 02 comment] Compendium

[Diego Ballve <diego.ballve@digital-artefacts.fi>]

Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> Richard Martell wrote:
> 
>> 5 [ADVISORY] In 2.8.1 perhaps change values to type Set<LongName>
>>   instead of Bag, since duplicate values don't appear to be meaningful
>>   in this context.
> 
> 
> Duplicate for values of a Slot do make sense. For example lets say the 
> Slot  values store the Gender of each student in a class. I know it is a 
> dumb example but thats the best I can think of at present. Suggest no 
> change.

Set, Bag or Sequence? I'd rather have sequence there, since it is more 
powerful than Set or Bag (i.e., you can represent a Set or a Bag in a 
Sequence but not the other way; you can randomize the order of an 
ordered collection after you get it, but it might not be possible to 
reorder an unordered collection to the same order it had on creation time).

We have discussed this about a year ago, I think, and by that time the 
use-case I had was that my value was longer than LongName, so I created 
extra logic in the client to break the value into many LongName (there's 
a flaw for searches, for instance, but anyway). For that I needed the 
registry to keep the order and not to return the objects in random order.

Regards,
Diego

-- 
Diego Ballve
Digital Artefacts Europe
http://www.digital-artefacts.fi