- From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:06:13 -0000
- To: <public-ddwg@w3.org>
> As a way of simplifying the interface I would avoid in these convenience > methods that receive strings as parameters to pass any kind of IRI, i.e. There is no way of getting the values of properties for a non default aspect unless the call with String IRI, String Aspect remains, unless we were either to re-introduce aspect as an Interface or unless we were to introduce an ANY_PROPERTY value. > The same would apply for getting a property value i.e. with the string > convenience methods you will only be allowed to ask things in the > default vocabulary and if you want to go to another voc you will need to > instantiate a SimplePropertyRef. That is already the case. There is no call that allows the specification of an IRI. Jo > -----Original Message----- > From: jmcf@tid.es [mailto:jmcf@tid.es] > Sent: 26 February 2008 17:15 > To: Jo Rabin > Cc: public-ddwg@w3.org > Subject: Re: getSimplePropertyValue : Suggested simplifications > > As a way of simplifying the interface I would avoid in these convenience > methods that receive strings as parameters to pass any kind of IRI, i.e. > if someone want to ask something about an aspect or property that are > not in the default vocabulary he will need to use the SimplePropertyRef > class, so the methods would be: > > *public* SimplePropertyValues > getSimplePropertyValues(SimpleEvidence evidence) > > *throws* SystemException; > > *public* SimplePropertyValues > getSimplePropertyValues(SimpleEvidence evidence, > > String aspectName) *throws* NameException, > SystemException; > > > *public* SimplePropertyValues > getSimplePropertyValues(SimpleEvidence evidence, > > SimplePropertyRef[] properties) *throws* NameException, > > SystemException; > > > The same would apply for getting a property value i.e. with the string > convenience methods you will only be allowed to ask things in the > default vocabulary and if you want to go to another voc you will need to > instantiate a SimplePropertyRef. > > This is the same approach that we took in Boston F2F for the fast food > methods, so we have a previous resolution that applies here > > Best Regards > > Jo Rabin escribió: > > > > At the moment we have 4 overloaded calls: > > > > > > > > *public* SimplePropertyValues > > getSimplePropertyValues(SimpleEvidence evidence) > > > > *throws* SystemException; > > > > > > > > *public* SimplePropertyValues > > getSimplePropertyValues(SimpleEvidence evidence, > > > > String aspectIRI, String aspectName) *throws* > > NameException, > > > > SystemException; > > > > > > > > *public* SimplePropertyValues > > getSimplePropertyValues(SimpleEvidence evidence, > > > > String aspectName) *throws* NameException, > > SystemException; > > > > > > > > *public* SimplePropertyValues > > getSimplePropertyValues(SimpleEvidence evidence, > > > > SimplePropertyRef[] properties) *throws* > NameException, > > > > SystemException; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it would be better if the first 3 were called > > getKnownSimplePropertyValues since the semantic is different from the > > following which returns values for all specified propoerties? > > > > > > > > Any views before I post an updated interface definition? > > > > > > > > Jo > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2008 18:06:51 UTC