Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [hyades-dev] Proposal for embedded annotations in Test Model


Joe,

I have a suggestion related with the URI, you could have a fully specified URI (not only relative to the resource), then you could differentiate embedded versus linked (external) annotations.
I had in mind this approach when I was trying to split the content of a resource in separate content files in the same XMI ZIP resource file by using the query portion of the URI in order to select the right content file.

Here is an example:

        URI to object: /.../path_to_model_resource/resource.zip#objID

        URI to embedded annotation: /.../path_to_model_resource/resource.zip?annotationID=/internal_path_to_annotation_file/Annotation1.gif

        URI to a linked (external to the model resource) annotation: /.../path_to_annotation_file/Annotation2.gif

were /.../ represents the prefix of the URI (scheme,device, etc), objID can be flat or hierarchical ID and internal_path_to_annotation_file could follow your schema (annotation folder + objID + annotation_file_name).

Thanks !
Marius



Joseph P Toomey <jptoomey@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: hyades-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx

04/13/2004 08:16 AM

Please respond to
hyades-dev

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






Thanks for your quick response, Mike.


Since the annotations are files, the intent is that the extension of the file name indicates the file's type.  We aren't inferring any type information from the test type -- any test type can have an arbitrary number of different types of annotations.  Any viewer/editor should be able to determine whether or not they can deal with a given annotation based on the file's extension.  In the Hyades 3.0 release, we may not expose these annotations via the Hyades test UIs, although a reasonable stretch goal is to show the presence of annotations within the editors, and allow an annotation's file to be opened using the default eclipse editor.  Obviously, you could implement more sophisticated behavior in your own editors/viewers, as well as within the base Hyades editors/viewers over time.


In addition to having the filename as part of the URI, each annotation also has a name (distinct from the filename), which should be used by the author of the annotation to appropriately name the annotation.  I think it would be worthwhile to enumerate and document the names that we expect to use, but again, the type information will be available as part of the filename in the URI.


Please let me know if this addresses your concern, and thanks again for the quick response.


--Joe


Joe Toomey
Advisory Software Engineer
Rational Software
IBM Software Group
Mike Norman <Michael.Norman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: hyades-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx

04/13/2004 05:49 AM

Please respond to
hyades-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

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


ForwardSourceID:NT00013EB6    


Back to the top