Notice: This Wiki is now read only and edits are no longer possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "Talk:ALF/Vocabularies/Requirements Management/Schema"
(Requirement Object content) |
|||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | [[ALF/Vocabularies/Requirements Management/Schema | Schema ]] | ||
+ | |||
== Requirement Object content == | == Requirement Object content == | ||
This wasn't described directly but I inferred the content. My assumption is that requirements are not huge and it is reasonable to fully materialize all the data for attributes and comments and sets of descriptors for links, versions , attachments etc. It may be thatshould be factored out differently based on the expected use cases and amount of data. | This wasn't described directly but I inferred the content. My assumption is that requirements are not huge and it is reasonable to fully materialize all the data for attributes and comments and sets of descriptors for links, versions , attachments etc. It may be thatshould be factored out differently based on the expected use cases and amount of data. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Object Ids == | ||
+ | |||
+ | I assume that the various objects can be identified by a string based unique ID. If the implmenting RM tool has relative IDs then it can create s composite id (eg DB.ProjectId.RequirementId.CommentId) It si unclear if this s a reasonable assumption. If teh auxillary objects cannot be identified in this way then we will need to make adjustments to the type-service-evetn definitions |
Latest revision as of 20:58, 10 August 2007
Requirement Object content
This wasn't described directly but I inferred the content. My assumption is that requirements are not huge and it is reasonable to fully materialize all the data for attributes and comments and sets of descriptors for links, versions , attachments etc. It may be thatshould be factored out differently based on the expected use cases and amount of data.
Object Ids
I assume that the various objects can be identified by a string based unique ID. If the implmenting RM tool has relative IDs then it can create s composite id (eg DB.ProjectId.RequirementId.CommentId) It si unclear if this s a reasonable assumption. If teh auxillary objects cannot be identified in this way then we will need to make adjustments to the type-service-evetn definitions