RE: Strawman for 0..n entity ids [WAS: [higgins-dev]Myposition onEntityI

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tom, good point. Are we saying that the proposed
IEntity.getCanonicalEntityId() and IEntity.getEntityIds() methods return
values that are fully qualified, i.e., include the ContextId?

Or are we assuming that if the calling app has located the Entity, it
already knows the ContextId, and thus these methods can return an EntityId
that may not be fully qualified, i.e., may only be Context-unique?

=Drummond 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Doman
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 3:03 PM
> To: Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions; higgins-dev-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Strawman for 0..n entity ids [WAS: [higgins-dev]Myposition
> onEntityId]
> 
> How is an entity resolvable w/o some reference to the context to which the
> entityID belongs anyway?  That is, I've understood that we're trying to
> say:
> 
> 1. ContextID + EntityID is a globally unique, fully qualified identifier.
> 2. An immutable #1 is usable in relationships.
> 
> Tom
> 
> >>> Anthony Nadalin <drsecure@xxxxxxxxxx> 09/18/08 10:58 PM >>>
> So to further qualify the EntityID is not an Identifier and not an
> attribute. The entityID may be fully qualified that is may have a
> referwnce to the context thus can resolve with out a contextID
> 
> -----------------
> Sent from my BlackBerry Handheld.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Drummond Reed" [drummond.reed@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 09/18/2008 09:11 PM MST
> To: "'Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions'" <higgins-
> dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: Strawman for 0..n entity ids [WAS: [higgins-dev] My position
> 	onEntityId]
> 
> 
> 
> Tony, I think everyone's on board that an EntityId represents a reference
> to
> exactly one Entity in a context. Now its about cardinality, immutability,
> and type. Regarding the first two, the current proposal is that if
> cardinality is 0..n, the IEntity.getEntityIds() method will return all of
> them (whether exposed as attributes or not), and the proposed
> IEntity.getCanonicalEntityId() method will return only the single EntityId
> specified in that context to be: a) canonical, b) immutable. If the
> context
> does not support either canonical immutable IDs, the
> IEntity.getCanonicalEntityId() method will return an error.
> 
> 
> 
> If there's agreement on that, then it's just down to the types returned by
> those methods and accepted by IContext.getEntity().
> 
> 
> 
> =Drummond
> 
> 
> 
>   _____
> 
> From: higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 10:34 AM
> To: Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions
> Cc: Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions;
> higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Strawman for 0..n entity ids [WAS: [higgins-dev] My position
> onEntityId]
> 
> 
> 
> Depends, no one is stating what an EntityID represents, my view is it
> resolves to the Entity within a context
> 
> Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
> 
> Inactive hide details for "Markus Sabadello" ---09/18/2008 12:30:56
> PM---After the call, I had this idea:"Markus Sabadello" ---09/18/2008
> 12:30:56 PM---After the call, I had this idea:
> 
> 
> 
> From:
> 
> 
> "Markus Sabadello" <msabadello@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> 
> To:
> 
> 
> "Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions"
> <higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> 
> Date:
> 
> 
> 09/18/2008 12:30 PM
> 
> 
> 
> Subject:
> 
> 
> Re: Strawman for 0..n entity ids [WAS: [higgins-dev] My position on
> EntityId]
> 
>   _____
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After the call, I had this idea:
> 
> 1. Let's say IEntity.getEntityIds() returns an array of Objects (in Java:
> Object[]). These Objects can either be Strings or IAttributeValues. If the
> EntityId is not exposed as an attribute, it's just a String. If it is
> exposed as an attribute, then it's an IAttributeValue.
> 
> 2. IEntity.getCanonicalEntityId() returns a single Object. As before, if
> the
> canonical EntityId is not exposed as an attribute, then the Object is a
> String. Otherwise it's an IAttributeValue.
> 
> 3. IContext.getEntity() has two overloaded versions. One that takes a
> String, and one that takes an IAttributeValue.
> 
> So in total:
> 
> public Object[] IEntityId.getEntityIds(); // Objects can either be String
> or
> IAttributeValue
> public Object IEntity.getCanonicalEntityId(); // Object can either be
> String
> or IAttributeValue
> public IEntity IContext.getEntity(String);
> public IEntity IContext.getEntity(IAttributeValue);
> 
> You don't invent something new for typing such as key-value pairs. You
> simply use the existing IAttributeValue interface. IAttributeValue already
> includes the type. And it can be complex, so you can do multi-part keys
> too.
> 
> All the IAttributeValue instances returned by IEntityId.getEntityIds() are
> guaranteed to also show up somewhere on the IEntity in an IAttribute that
> is
> a sub-attribute of higgins:synonym.
> 
> Would that work?
> 
> Markus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev