Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[higgins-dev] IdAS changes proposal

Paul,
 
I suppose, cdm:entityId is redundant and we can use rdf:ID instead. As a result:
 
1.1. In this case IEntity.getEntityID() will retun rdf:ID.
1.2. In case of blank entity (previously known as a complex value) it should return null.
1.3. entityId attribute will be eliminated.
 
I suppose we need to do the following changes to IdAS interfaces to be compatible with CDM:
 
2.1. BlankEntity class has been eliminated from cdm.owl. So, I suppose we need to do the same for IdAS interfaces and replace IBlankEntity with IEntity (eliminate IBlankEntity interface).
 
Because there is no any difference between entity and complex value, we can define the following:
 
2.2. If Entity has been created by IContext.addEntity(entityType, entityID) method, it should always have entityID (should not be a blank entity). In other words, a unique value should be generated by a context and used as entityId, if no entityId passed.
2.3. If Entity has been created by IAttribute.addValue(URI) method, it should be a blank entity.
2.4. If Entity has been added by IAttribute.addValue(IAttributeValue) it should be the same type as passed entity. If passed entity is a blank entity, new blank entity should be created as a copy of passed, otherwise a reference to the existent (non blank) entity should be created.
2.5. When Entity is deleted, all its subentities which are a blank entity should be deleted too.
 
Also we need more flex IFilter API:
 
3.1. IFilter should be able to query both types of entities as blank as usual.
3.2. IFilter should be able to query a separate value (entity or simple value) of any nesting level, not only direct attributes of Entity.
 
Also I have some notes about CDM:
 
4.1. CDM.owl contains entityRelation and contextRelation object properties. Do we need to reflect them in IdAS interfaces?
4.2. Namespase of cdm.owl http://www.eclipse.org/higgins/ontologies/2008/6/cdm.owl ends with .owl. Is it correct?
 
Thanks,
Sergey Lyakhov

Back to the top