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

[Mark Wilkinson]

I guess it would be type='null' or something like that.

I agree that this is the only case where Yan's proposal breaks.  We do,
actually, have quite a few Objects that inherit from Object without
going through a primitive, and therefore have no content at all and
should not be assumed to default to type="sting"

I don't think we can (nor should) require that our final solution
doesn't break anything.  It is more important to get it right in the 1.0
spec than to salvage legacy services.  As such, I'm not so concerned
about having a default state - if we are going to go this route, then I
think it should be a requirement to have a type='' attribute.  

The other advantage of Yan's solution is that it is much more XML-like,
and we can use the XML type attributes exactly as they are!

I like that!!

How do the Java crowd feel about this?

M

On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 11:06 -0700, Eddie Kawas wrote:
> I like Yans idea, but what happens if the object doesn't
> inherit from String, isn't an int or a float? What if the
> object was a schematikonMotifID that inherits from
> SchematikonSegmentID that inherits from Object. What would
> the data:type be in this case?
> 
> <schematikonMotifID articleName="" id="" namespace="">
>         <String articleName="ID" id="" namespace=""/>
> </schematikonMotifID>
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: moby-dev-bounces at portal.open-bio.org [mailto:moby-
> > dev-bounces at portal.open-bio.org] On Behalf Of
> > ywong at infobiogen.fr
> > Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 10:55 AM
> > To: markw at illuminae.com; Core developer announcements
> > Subject: Re: [moby] Re: [MOBY-dev] a question and a
> > comment about the new Objectinheritance
> > 
> > > 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
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > MOBY-dev mailing list
> > MOBY-dev at biomoby.org
> > http://www.biomoby.org/mailman/listinfo/moby-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MOBY-dev mailing list
> MOBY-dev at biomoby.org
> http://www.biomoby.org/mailman/listinfo/moby-dev