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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep message

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

Subject: Re: [regrep] [Issue] Should we separate single value vs. collection ofvalues slots?

In today's meeting Carl made an interesting suggestion that makes Slots 
even more OO.
He suggested that we represent the new collectionType attribute in 
RegRep 4 as sub-classes
of MultiValuedSlotType:

   |----------- SingleValueSlotType
   |----------- MultiValueSlotType
   |----------- MapSlotType (keeps a Map of key/value pairs)

Thank you Carl for the interesting suggestion and please correct me if I 
made any mistakes conveying your ideas.

What do other TC members think?

carl mattocks wrote:
> Yes - I think this is the right approach.. makes it more explicit when 
> a list of values is expected
> On 3/14/08, *Farrukh Najmi* <farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com 
> <mailto:farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com>> wrote:
>     A common issue I have seen in RegRep implementation and deployment is
>     that rim:SlotType defines a Collection of values on a SlotType but
>     often
>     a Slot only has a single value. I am wondering if it makes sense
>     for us
>     to separate these into two separate types derived form a common
>     type as
>     follows:
>     SlotType
>        |----------- SingleValueSlotType
>        |
>        |----------- MultiValueSlotType
>     IMHO, this is one of those peculiarities in our model that make it
>     harder to use. I believe we should fix it in 4.0 as we are already
>     making considerable improvements in Slots.
>     What do folks think?

Farrukh Najmi

Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com

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