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 "Context Data Model 1.1 Open Issues"
(→Documentation) |
(→Attribute Values) |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
#* This PPT was updated to the latest concepts terms and improved a bit based on feedback from the Jan/Provo F2F: [http://dev.eclipse.org/viewsvn/index.cgi/org.eclipse.higgins/trunk/doc/org.eclipse.higgins.doc/Higgins-Data-Model-Intro.ppt?root=Technology_SVN&view=co Higgins Data Model Intro.PPT] | #* This PPT was updated to the latest concepts terms and improved a bit based on feedback from the Jan/Provo F2F: [http://dev.eclipse.org/viewsvn/index.cgi/org.eclipse.higgins/trunk/doc/org.eclipse.higgins.doc/Higgins-Data-Model-Intro.ppt?root=Technology_SVN&view=co Higgins Data Model Intro.PPT] | ||
− | + | # Can we represent closed (non-mixed) types in OWL so that the LDAP CP can represent its schema? | |
+ | == Resolved Issues == | ||
# Mixed attribute value data types | # Mixed attribute value data types | ||
− | + | ## Daniel points out that it would still be good to pass type on each value add: | |
− | + | ### http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03816.html | |
− | + | ### http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03818.html (and follow-ups) | |
− | + | ## Resolution: we '''can''' mix types. | |
− | ## Resolution | + | # Can an attribute have mixed values consisting of both simple and complex? |
− | + | ## Resolution: Yes. | |
− | ## | + | |
− | + | == Open Issues === | |
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
# Closed or open simple data types | # Closed or open simple data types | ||
## http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03821.html | ## http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03821.html | ||
## Paul asserts that we have the ability already to specify a format constraint along with a data type. For example, one could say the data type of an attribute is normalizedString, but constrained to a pattern that looks like a telephone number | ## Paul asserts that we have the ability already to specify a format constraint along with a data type. For example, one could say the data type of an attribute is normalizedString, but constrained to a pattern that looks like a telephone number | ||
## We can do this by creating a [[Data Range]]. A [[Data Range]] has a base XML Schema type (e.g. string) as well as all of the XML Schema facets (e.g. pattern, etc.) | ## We can do this by creating a [[Data Range]]. A [[Data Range]] has a base XML Schema type (e.g. string) as well as all of the XML Schema facets (e.g. pattern, etc.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Closed Issues == | ||
+ | # Many same-types attributes | ||
+ | ## http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03806.html | ||
+ | ## Resolution: No. (We should document that this isn't allowed/possible) | ||
+ | # Allow zero-valued attributes | ||
+ | ## http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03810.html | ||
+ | ## Resolution: we should '''not''' allow zero-valued attributes in the model per se. It is true that for access control reasons, no value will be returned in some cases. | ||
===Related to higgins.owl=== | ===Related to higgins.owl=== |
Revision as of 18:48, 4 March 2008
Contents
General
- Need a replacement term for "Node". Most higgins developers don't like it.
- Worth noting somewhere: Node Relations are only an abstract super-types for real, useful relations like "memberOf", "reportsTo", "friend". Or "hasFavoriteBook", "hasCreditCard", etc.
- Tony: We don't have a simplified description of the data model
- Need a simple-to-follow set of pictures that explain the data model
- This PPT was updated to the latest concepts terms and improved a bit based on feedback from the Jan/Provo F2F: Higgins Data Model Intro.PPT
- Can we represent closed (non-mixed) types in OWL so that the LDAP CP can represent its schema?
Resolved Issues
- Mixed attribute value data types
- Daniel points out that it would still be good to pass type on each value add:
- Resolution: we can mix types.
- Can an attribute have mixed values consisting of both simple and complex?
- Resolution: Yes.
Open Issues =
- Closed or open simple data types
- http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03821.html
- Paul asserts that we have the ability already to specify a format constraint along with a data type. For example, one could say the data type of an attribute is normalizedString, but constrained to a pattern that looks like a telephone number
- We can do this by creating a Data Range. A Data Range has a base XML Schema type (e.g. string) as well as all of the XML Schema facets (e.g. pattern, etc.)
Closed Issues
- Many same-types attributes
- http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03806.html
- Resolution: No. (We should document that this isn't allowed/possible)
- Allow zero-valued attributes
- http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/higgins-dev/msg03810.html
- Resolution: we should not allow zero-valued attributes in the model per se. It is true that for access control reasons, no value will be returned in some cases.
Related to higgins.owl
- Ability to declare user-defined Classes to be 'closed', that is instances of them should follow the class definition, but not include any other "extra" properties.
- This entire wiki page: HOWL is out of date with the rest of this wiki
LDAP-specific Issues
- LDAP Issues and To-Dos --open issues specifically related to LDAP schema