[Nml-wg] Base schema question.

[John MacAuley]

That answers my question.

Thank you,
John

> On Dec 1, 2013, at 5:47 PM, Freek Dijkstra <Freek.Dijkstra at surfsara.nl> wrote:
> 
>> On 01-12-2013 22:35, John MacAuley wrote:
>> 
>> Quick question - What was the "BidirectionalPort" element not rapped in
>> a "hasBidirectionalPort" Relation element like all the other NML elements?
> 
> Hi John,
> 
> I'm not entirely sure about your question. Are you asking why there is
> no "hasBidirectionalPort" relation? In particular why there is no
> 
>  Group (like Topology) --(hasBidirectionalPort)--> BidirectionalPort
> 
> relation?
> 
> Mostly to avoid any possible confusion about direction. The lack of
> hasBidirectionalPort forces users to really distinguish between the
> hasOutboundPort and hasInboundPort. (Otherwise, a Topology could contain
> a BidirectionalPort, and that BidrectionalPort could contain two Ports,
> but then it would be unclear what direction these two Ports would be).
> 
> We had a 'little' discussion about verbosity of NML, but decided that
> verbosity would be the solution least likely to cause problems in the
> future.
> 
> Freek
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nml-wg mailing list
> nml-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nml-wg