On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi,
On Jun 5, 2013, at 9:27 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>
wrote:
On Jun 5, 2013, at 4:10 PM, Usman Bhatti <usman.bhatti(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We discussed with Anne and Mathieu about the project moose on the web
and how
would we search for an entity in a model by interacting with the
moose server implementing REST API.
>
> - The first API request to the server is allModels and then the server
responds with the list of the moose models (JSON data). Once the user has
got a list of model, how can one choose the model one wants to explore. One
can select a moose model based on: i) its name, ii) its position in the
collection returned by the server (1 for first, 2 for second, etc.) or iii)
its mooseID. The name of a moose model is not unique so it does not help
choosing the correct unique model. For the time, we choose the position in
the collection returned by the server but if we have huge list, the
position is difficult to remember. mooseID does not have semantic meaning.
A meaningful solution would be to make all moose models have a unique name.
What do you think?
I think that at first you should only work with only one model in one
image :).
Ok, we'll overlook this for the moment.
> - Generalizing the search to all the entities
in the model, how do you
select an Entity with its name in the model knowing that
the names are not
unique (there can be two "add:" in a model). Scoping information can help
and we have mooseName that concatenates the name with the scoping
information of an entity. So a method named get() in java with class and
package information appended looks like "java.utils::Scanner.get()". Is the
name uniqueness guaranteed with this mechanism?
In the past every entity had a uniqueName even invocation and attribute
accesses.
They still have a unique name as much as possible, only we only guarantee
the unique names for named entities and only within the entities of the
same kind. For example, you can have a package and a namespace with the
same unique name, but both of them will be unique within their
corresponding group.
So, you should not rely on a global search. Instead you can have something
like:
get?classNamed=com::example::ClassA
Or even better:
getClass?mooseName=com::example::ClassA
Ok the second option is better. As the types of entities vary from one
model to another, the server can communicate to the client the types of
entities it contains.
Cheers,
Doru
> We had a discussion regarding the interaction
with the server, I'll
send a separate mail for it.
Usman
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev