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

[Gary Mazz]

I thought associative composition was only used in "conceptual 
diagrams".  Inheritance associations are normally included in "design 
class diagrams".
Very different levels and roles..

-gary


On 11/11/2010 12:45 PM, Andy Edmonds wrote:
> Category attributes are there by association (a type of inheritance by 
> associative composition).
>
> Andy
> andy.edmonds.be <http://andy.edmonds.be>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 17:33, Gary Mazz <garymazzaferro at gmail.com 
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org>
>     on behalf of Gary Mazz
>     >> Sent: Wed 10/11/2010 08:34
>     >> To: occi-wg at ogf.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:occi-wg at ogf.org>
>     >>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >
>     >
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     occi-wg mailing list
>     occi-wg at ogf.org <mailto: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/20101112/1875820d/attachment.html