5 Jun
2013
5 Jun
'13
9:45 p.m.
Hi,
On Jun 5, 2013, at 9:27 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote:
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
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them."
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 :).
- 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. 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