ISSUE 116: SDO types should have SDO DataObject Type as base

["Barack, Ron" <ron.barack@sap.com>]

Hi Everyone,

 

I've reviewed the spec on this point.  Sections 7.5 (line 2212) and 8.1 (line 2538) definitely associate {commonj.sdo}DataObject with anyType.  As Frank pointed out, this is enough to suggest that any DataObject can be used as a value if the property type is DataObject.

 

On the other hand, section 6.2 says that {commonj.sdo}DataObject doesn't map to any XSD construct at all, though I think this was meant to say that there is not concrete mapping, as opposed to ChangeSummaryType.  The deeper question is why we talk about XSD mapping at all at this point in the spec, we're still at the description of the metamodel.

 

I would propose that we remove the second column of the table in 6.2 entirely, replacing it with a column "Comments", as follows:

 

SDO Abstract Type URI = http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sdo/200812	Comments
ChangeSummaryType   abstract=true   dataType=true	Not instanciated through the API.  An SDO implementation MUST return a ChangeSummary object whenever a property with ChangeSummaryType is accessed. [COR06020002]
DataObject   abstract=true	When the isInstance method on the DataObject type is passed any DataObject, an SDO implementation MUST return true, regardless of the DataObject’s type.  [COR06020003] For single valued properties with type DataObject, an SDO implementation MUST allow the property’s value to be set to any DataObject. [COR06020004] For multivalued properties, an SDO implementation MUST allow any DataObject to be added to the list of values.  [COR06020005]
DataTypeWrapper	Instances are generated by the implementation when a DataObject is required, but the value is a dataType.  See section  4.4.6.

 

Comments?

 

Ron