Re[2]: [higgins-dev] Editing multi-valued attributes (was Re: Some chang

[Valery Kokhan <vkokhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

But actually it means that we rather have two attributes with single
value each then single attribute with two values...

> Yeah, actually you can extrapolate from
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Person-with-address_Example_Context_Ontology
>  
> I think it would look something like this:
>  
> <pwa:Person rdf:about="urn:mary">
>   <pwa:postalAdress rdf:resource="urn:homeAddress"/>
>   <pwa:postalAdress rdf:resource="urn:workAddress"/>
> </pwa:Person>
> <pwa:PostalAddress rdf:about="urn:homeAddress">
>   <pwa:city>Provo</pwa:city>
>   <pwa:country>USA</pwa:country>
>   <pwa:postalCode>12345</pwa:postalCode>
>   <pwa:state>Utah</pwa:state>
>   <pwa:streetAddress>123 Main St.</pwa:streetAddress>
> </pwa:PostalAddress>
>  
> <pwa:PostalAddress rdf:about="urn:workAddress">
>   <pwa:city>Provo</pwa:city>
>   <pwa:country>USA</pwa:country>
>   <pwa:postalCode>12345</pwa:postalCode>
>   <pwa:state>Utah</pwa:state>
>   <pwa:streetAddress>555 Research Park</pwa:streetAddress>
> </pwa:PostalAddress>


>>>> "Sergey Lyakhov" <slyakhov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2/27/07 7:29 AM >>>

>  
> Jim,
>  
>> For (c), why are we unable to set more than one complex value for an attribute?
>  
> Let's assume that we use 
> http://www.eclipse.org/higgins/ontologies/2006/person-with-address.owl schema.
> In this case we have one Person with <pwa:postalAddress> complex attribute as below:
>  

> <pwa:Person>
>  
>     <pwa:postalAddress>
>          <pwa:PostalAddress>
>               <pwa:city>Provo</pwa:city>
>               <pwa:country>USA</pwa:country>
>          </pwa:PostalAddress>
>     </pwa:postalAddress>
> </pwa:Person>
>  
> Individual <pwa:PostalAddress> represents the complex value
> (where <pwa:city> and <pwa:country> are properties of this value).
> So, to set more than one complex value we need to set for the Person
> a few individuals of <pwa:PostalAddress> (that is to create a few
> different attributes) or to set all properties of complex values to
> the same individual </pwa:PostalAddress> (to mix properties of
> different values). Is there some other way that I should use?
>  
>  
>  
> Thanks,
> Sergey Lyakhov 
>  
>  
> ----- Original Message ----- 
>  
> From: Jim Sermersheim 
>  
> To: 'Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions' 
>  
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 1:43 AM
>  
> Subject: [higgins-dev] Editing multi-valued attributes (was Re: Some changesto IdAS proposal)
>  

>  
> Hey Sergey,
>  
>  
>  
> I'm going to make threads for each of these

>>1. I propose to remove the method getValues() from IProperty interface. 
>>There are some reasons to do it:
>>
>>a)    We need to be able to change a value of Attribute (that extends 
>>IProperty interface), but we can't say exactly which value will be changed 
>>in case if Attibute has two or more values;
>>b)    we can't foreknow which value will be returned by getValue() method if 
>>Attibute has two or more values;
>>c)    this method (getValues()) has no any sense in case of complex value 
>>because we unable to set more then one complex value for attribute;
>  
> For (a), yes, this is a problem with the current way update APIs
> are defined.  Update APIs need to be fixed.  We've been talking for
> some time about refactoring update operations such that one can
> build up sets of modifications.  In such a model, to change a
> particular value one would perform an update operation on a digital
> subject, where the update set contained two modifications.  For
> example, let's say there's an attribute called "phoneNumber" and it
> has two values "888-525-1111" and "888-332-8471".  One would build an update set like this:
>  
> { delete("phoneNumber", "888-525-1111"), add("phoneNumber",
> "888-555-1212") }.  This is just an abstraction of the update set
> argument. The intent is to allow multiple sub-updates to be grouped
> as an atomic update operation.  It works well because it not only
> lets us specify *which* value we're working with, it also allows us
> to assert that a particular value exists prior to being changed.
>  
>  
>  
> For (b), I don't know that anyone likes this method.  It has been
> suggested a number of times to just delete it.  I'm beginning to prefer this as well.
>  
>  
>  
> For (c), why are we unable to set more than one complex value for an attribute?
>  
>  
>  
> Jim
>  
>  

>   
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev


>