[occi-wg] OCCI Core ready for public comment version

[Andy Edmonds]

Category attributes are there by association (a type of inheritance by
associative composition).

Andy
andy.edmonds.be


On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 17:33, Gary Mazz <garymazzaferro at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think the real issue is the disconnect between the  Resource and the
> Category. Resource extends Entity and Entity is a stand alone abstract
> class.  There is no inheritance from Category, so no Category attributes
> in Resource..  We need a generalization relationship between Category
> and Entity.
>
> Multiplicity and Set(s) are implementation details, possibly not
> appropriate for this model.
>
> cheers,
> gary
>
> On 11/11/2010 2:09 AM, Ralf Nyren wrote:
> > True, overall ok but the UML-to-Java tool does not seem to have taken
> > the association multiplicity into account. As Thijs says, there should
> > be Set<Entity> etc.
> >
> > regards, Ralf
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:55:13 +0100, Thijs Metsch
> > <tmetsch at platform.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Generally looks good I guess - thanks for this Gary - very helpful!
> >>
> >> I'm just wondering if the Entity's mixin attribtue should be a
> >> set...That's what the core diagram says at least...
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> -Thijs
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org on behalf of Gary Mazz
> >> Sent: Wed 10/11/2010 08:34
> >> To: occi-wg at ogf.org
> >> Subject: Re: [occi-wg] OCCI Core ready for public comment version
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I tool the opportunity to auto generate code from the UML. We should
> >> take a look at it and see if this is what we really mean.
> >>
> >>
> >> cheers,
> >> gary
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/8/2010 7:50 PM, Michael Behrens wrote:
> >>> The diagram looks good & reads well to me.
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Ralf Nyren wrote:
> >>>> Michael,
> >>>>
> >>>> Please find attached a version of the core model with Kind split into
> >>>> two separate classes. Was it something like this you were looking for?
> >>>>
> >>>> To me it makes sense to do the split. Before we had the abstraction
> >>>> between Category and Kind it was tempting to stuff all functionality
> >>>> into the Category. I do not think it is anymore.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think this, exactly as you say Michael, definitely help clear
> >>>> things up a bit :)
> >>>>
> >>>> If there are any objections I need them asap, if this is going in I
> >>>> need to start updating the core doc tomorrow. And if anyone has a
> >>>> better name than "Mixin" please speak up!
> >>>>
> >>>> regards, Ralf
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 05:35:34 +0100, Michael Behrens
> >>>> <michael.behrens at r2ad.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I see that the core UML model has been updated, interesting changes.
> >>>>> The name
> >>>>> changes look okay to me (Entity, Kind).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2-cents: Structural and Non-Structural concept might be confusing to
> >>>>> folks
> >>>>> reading it the first time through. Perhaps its purpose
> >>>>> (extensibility) could be
> >>>>> stated before their definitions in a non normative manner. Lastly,
> >>>>> would adding
> >>>>> two subclass of kind (structured/unstructured) help clear things a
> >>>>> bit? (The
> >>>>> text seems to speak as if there are two subclasses).
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> core_model.png
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Michael Behrens
> >>> R2AD, LLC
> >>> (571) 594-3008 (cell)
> >>> (703) 714-0442 (land)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> occi-wg mailing list
> >>> occi-wg at ogf.org
> >>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> occi-wg mailing list
> occi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/attachments/20101111/9ebcce4f/attachment.html