Re: [hyades-dev] Proposal for embedded annotations in Test Model

[Harm Sluiman <sluiman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

It would not hurt to add a "mime-type"
to the model to type the additional resource. The default behaviour of
a viewer/editor should be to let the workbench resolve the viewer/editor
action allowed, and that has historically been done by file extension.
Adding a mime-type would just provide some additional hints to the model
viewer/editor.

I had suggested to Joe to use the term
annotation because this is intended to annotate a description or history
with external resources. However this should not be confused with a generalized
way if annotating or extending the model, where it is clear from the many
threads of discussion on that topic that any name/value pair extension
would need a type property as well to allow for open interpretation of
the extension.

Thanks for your time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harm Sluiman, STSM,  
phone:905-413-4032   fax: 4920  
cell: 416-432-9754
mailto:sluiman@xxxxxxxxxx
Admin : Gabrielle Chapman chapmaga@xxxxxxxxxx  Tie: 969-2323

Mike Norman <Michael.Norman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: hyades-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx

04/13/2004 05:49 AM

Please respond to
hyades-dev

To	hyades-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject	Re: [hyades-dev] Proposal for embedded annotations in Test Model

My reading of this is that according to the current proposal
if an alternative viewer/editor opens up the model, all it sees is a URI,
it can't know wether or not it can deal with the annotations that are there.
At te moment I assume that the editor will branch off the test type, but
can we at this stage simply put some type information. in the model relating
to the annotation so that we stand a chance of dealing with them in a more
flexible way in later versions?

Joseph P Toomey wrote:

Attached is a short proposal for adding embedded annotations to the Test
Model.  This is a feature request that we have received from several
consumers, and would like to implement for Hyades 3.0.  In order to
do this, we need to close on this design very quickly.  I ask everyone
from the Test Model team to please review this proposal (it is less than
a page in length), and respond with any concerns about the proposal.  I
have discussed the details of the proposal with Harm, and he is in agreement
with this approach for adding annotations to model elements, and with the
desire to provide a test model annotation solution in the 3.0 timeframe.

As you know, we are all driving hard to meet our 3.0 deadlines.  In
order to get this feature integrated in time, we need to close on the design
before this week's test model meeting.  Please use the mailing list
to discuss any concerns.  In the absence of feedback, I will assume
that the test model team is in agreement with this proposal.



Thanks for your attention, 
--Joe 


Joe Toomey 
Advisory Software Engineer
Rational Software
IBM Software Group