directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ole Ersoy <>
Subject Re: [DAS] Type's ObjectClass Entry
Date Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:55:39 GMT
Hey Alex,

(BTW - If you are pressed for time, just say "Ole I'll review
this later - Worst case I'll bump into a constraint, and have to reroute 
:-) )  No big deal.

Hopefully this clears the fog a little

> What I am saying is you don't need to do this at all.  I think you're 
> missing some big concepts.   When you define the employee object class 
> and need an attribute to reference the department complex object just 
> use the m-must or m-may attributes.

The reason I want "m-complexMay" or "m-complexMust" is because
these tell the DAS to create an EReference when restoring metadata.

"m-may" and "m-must" tell the DAS to create an EAttribute when
restoring metadata.

If I use the approach you are suggesting I have to do additional
processing to figure out whether it's an EReference or EAttribute.
Not that it is a huge deal, but I think "m-ComplexMay" and 
"m-ComplexMust" is cleaner, and will result in better performance.

> Sorry about my frustration but I feel like I'm spending a lot of time 
> and my words are not describing things well enough for you to understand. 

No pb.  Hopefully I come across as if I understand what you are saying 
now.  I think the two are minor differences in approach, unless I'm 
still missing something.

How about this.  I'll try it out.  If I'm missing something.  I'll
get smacked.  Then I'll rework it your way.  I just think it's a simpler
design with "m-complexMay" and "m-complexMust".

Incidentally the SDO JSR takes your approach.  They define everything as
a Type.  So no EAttribute and EReference.  They are both just Type.  I 
still like the additional semantics behind EAttribute and EReference, so
I'll give it a shot.  Maybe I'll get burnt, and then you can tell me "I 
told you so!"  :-)

- Ole

View raw message