Re: [higgins-dev] IdAS out-of-sync issues

[Greg Byrd <gbyrd@xxxxxxxx>]

Honestly, the Word file is there because I can't contribute/commit code 
yet.  I view the Word file
as a temporary document, which will be replaced by the Javadoc.   
Probably the Word document should
just disappear now.

I do plan to work on the Wiki pages to get them in sync with our current 
thinking.

...Greg



Jim Sermersheim wrote:
> We actually have three definitions of some interfaces when you include 
> the API descriptions on pages like 
> http://spwiki.editme.com/ContextProvider
>
> >>> "Jim Sermersheim" <jimse@xxxxxxxxxx> 7/27/06 5:57 PM >>>
> Here's what's out of sync between the word doc at 
> http://spwiki.editme.com/files/IdentityAttributeService/idas-methods-0727.doc and 
> the checked-in interfaces:
>  
> 1) Repository missing IdASRegistry (we just haven't coded this yet)
> 2) Repository: IContextFactory.canCreate(contextRef) is like (but 
> different from) Doc: IContextFactory.isOpenable(contextRef, identity)
> 3) Repository: IContextFactory.getName() missing from Doc.
> 4) Repository: IContext extends IHasRelationships<URI>. Doc: IContext 
> extends IHasRelationships<IContext>
> 5) Repository: IContext.isOpen missing from Doc.
> 6) Repository: IContext.createRelationship(type) inherits from 
> IHasRelationship. Doc: IContext.createRelationship(type) does not.
> 7) Repository: IDigitalSubject.getType() returns String. Doc 
> IDigitalSubject.getType() returns URI.
> 8) Repository: IDigitalSubject.getAttribute(URI attrID) missing from Doc.
> 9) Repository: IMetadataItem.createMetadataItem missing from Doc.
> 10) Repository: IHasRelationships.createRelationship missing from Doc 
> (See 6)
> 11) Repository: IHasMetadata is completely different from Doc.
>  
> Earlier today, Tom was trying to implement to the word doc, This will 
> be problematic if we don't either: a) keep the doc tightly in sync 
> with the repository, b) use the repository as the authoritative source.
>  
> Do we need something like the word doc because it's easier to quickly 
> update than the Java interfaces, or because it's more readable than 
> the Javadoc?  If it's the latter, we can look around for a Javadoc 
> emitter that produces something similar to the word doc. If it's the 
> former, We should probably stop updating the interfaces ahead of the 
> word doc to prevent having two diverging interfaces. Actually, I 
> dislike that suggestion. I don't want to edit the word doc, then edit 
> the code and javadoc to match it, ugh!
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>