[moby] Re: [MOBY-dev] a question and a comment about the new Objectinheritance

[ywong at infobiogen.fr]

> On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 16:50 +0100, Martin Senger wrote:
>> Well, I myself is not the main player in this dicussion about inheriting
>> from primitives but as far as I understand, this:
>>
>> > <String ns='' id=''>
>> > 	<string>content here</string>
>> > </String>
>> >
>>    is what everybody wanted in the meeting
>
> Ummmm... I think there was a lot of disagreement about what "everybody"
> wanted... By the looks of it now, everybody wanted something different,
> but were calling it the same thing :-)  Unfortunately, when I asked for
> some example objects, nobody volunteered, so we couldn't sort it out at
> the time.
>
> I remember vividly, however, that when I tried to write that (above XML)
> on the screen, the room erupted in screams that I was making it all too
> complicated, so I don't think that is what people wanted.  It may be
> that we have all had time to digest the issue a bit more deeply now and
> have come to the same conclusion?
>
> M
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MOBY-dev mailing list
> MOBY-dev at biomoby.org
> http://www.biomoby.org/mailman/listinfo/moby-dev
>
Sorry I could reply earlier, all our network is in a quagmire...

An alternative I would accept:

<moby:Text-formatted data:type="string">
   blablablablablablalbalbalblablalbalba
</moby:Text-formatted>

  An attribute is optional, we keep the actual version without killing
everything (adding a subnode and all serializers/deserializers would
have to be rewritten!)

  People using Java will know what is the type of the data by reading this
attribute. If it doesn't exist, they should assume that by default, it
is a string.

  Example of DNASequence:

  <moby:DNASequence>
    <moby:String articleName="SequenceString">
      ACTGTCAGCTAGCTAGCTCGATCGATCGATCGTACGTCGTACGTACGATCGT....
    </moby:String>
    <moby:Integer articleName="Length" data:type="int">152</moby:Integer>
  </moby:DNASequence>

  Then we should agree of what "primitives" we have:
  -string
  -float
  -int

  maybe are there others?

  It is a quick and dirty solution however it is IMHO cleaner than what I
saw in the last example. It has the advantage to keep the "old" object
layout but add informations that will greatly help people who implements
type sensible clients.

  Greetings

Yan