|
To save a couple more char's, we could go to RelatedSubject and RelatedContext :)
Joking side, I'm fine with the change, though I think it would be good to reflect this in the appropriate IdAS interfaces and methods (IContextRelationship, IContext.addRelationship, etc.).
So, if/when you feel like making this change to the HOWL, remind me to change it in IdAS, or log a defect along the same lines.
Jim
sent while swinging in the hammock set among renowned Higgins committer Jim Sermersheim's fabulous Upper Woodland Hills beautifully wooded acreage on a sunny Thursday afternoon in July.
>>> Greg Byrd <gbyrd@xxxxxxxx> 7/24/07 9:00 AM >>>
I don't quite see the advantage of changing relationship to relation, but I don't have any real objections, either.
So is this "+0"?
...Greg
Paul Trevithick wrote:
After working with Drummond Reed on [1] I now see that a “Contextualized SubjectId” or “CSId” is synonymous with SubjectRelationship as defined here [2].
Rather than have two names for the same concept, I propose we replace them both with “SubjectRelation” (loosing the “ship” shortens things a tiny bit and lines up better with the higgins:relation property). For symmetry I also propose replacing ContextRelationship with ContextRelation while we’re at it.
-Paul
[1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/ContextId#ABNF
[2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Subject_Relationship
_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
| 