Skip to main content
Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Context Data Model 1.1 Open Issues"

 
(Related to Higgins.owl)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Related to Higgins.owl==
 
==Related to Higgins.owl==
 
# Higgins.owl: we need to add the full set of DatatypeAttribute subclasses that correspond to the XML Schema types. We currently have only StringDatatypeAttribute. We need to add Base64BinaryDatatypeAttribute, NormalizedStringDatatypeAttribute, ... and all the rest
 
# Higgins.owl: we need to add the full set of DatatypeAttribute subclasses that correspond to the XML Schema types. We currently have only StringDatatypeAttribute. We need to add Base64BinaryDatatypeAttribute, NormalizedStringDatatypeAttribute, ... and all the rest
 +
# Should we change DatatypeAttribute to SimpleAttribute and ObjectAttribute to ComplexAttribute? This would line up better with Jim's latest API
  
 
==Related to Higgins.owl's relationship to the IdAS API==
 
==Related to Higgins.owl's relationship to the IdAS API==
 
# API currently assumes that the 'type' of the value of an Attribute can be determined a priori by an examination of the 'type' (see getType() on IProperty) of the IAttribute (IProperty). At best only a the supertype can be a priori determined, and in some cases multiple supertypes are allowed. (Details in Paul's email to Jim and the list of Fri 9/22)
 
# API currently assumes that the 'type' of the value of an Attribute can be determined a priori by an examination of the 'type' (see getType() on IProperty) of the IAttribute (IProperty). At best only a the supertype can be a priori determined, and in some cases multiple supertypes are allowed. (Details in Paul's email to Jim and the list of Fri 9/22)

Revision as of 18:46, 24 September 2006

Related to Higgins.owl

  1. Higgins.owl: we need to add the full set of DatatypeAttribute subclasses that correspond to the XML Schema types. We currently have only StringDatatypeAttribute. We need to add Base64BinaryDatatypeAttribute, NormalizedStringDatatypeAttribute, ... and all the rest
  2. Should we change DatatypeAttribute to SimpleAttribute and ObjectAttribute to ComplexAttribute? This would line up better with Jim's latest API

Related to Higgins.owl's relationship to the IdAS API

  1. API currently assumes that the 'type' of the value of an Attribute can be determined a priori by an examination of the 'type' (see getType() on IProperty) of the IAttribute (IProperty). At best only a the supertype can be a priori determined, and in some cases multiple supertypes are allowed. (Details in Paul's email to Jim and the list of Fri 9/22)

Back to the top