more persistence layer questions

[Jeff Faath <jf...@apache.org>]

Have a couple more questions regarding the persistence layer.  Actually, I
think they're all related.  As you know, I'm trying to map API objects
generated from the v3 schema to the persistence layer.  However, the
persistence layer in many instances seems to be built from the v2
structures.  Are we doing this to maintain backwards compatibility?  Here
are the discrepancies I've located so far:

 

1)      The "operator" and "authorizedName" properties on BusinessEntity and
TModel no longer exist in v3 but are in the persistence layer objects.

 

2)      CategoryBags now allow one to group KeyedReference groups in a
KeyedReferenceGroup structure which refers to a TModel.  There is no way to
persist this structure in the model.

 

3)      The Tmodel entity in the persistence layer seems incorrect.  There's
no reference to an OverviewDoc and in fact in v3, there should be a
collection of OverviewDocs.  There's a TmodelOverview class, but I don't see
it referenced anywhere.  I also see a collection of TmodelDocDescr, which is
presumably the  OverviewDoc descriptions?  Anyway, I think some work needs
to be done here.

 

4)      Contacts allow a collection of personNames in v3 as opposed to just
the one provided by the model.

 

As stated before, it may be that our objective is to keep the data structure
as close to that of the v2 release as possible.  If so, I can try to work
around the mappings, however that seems to defeat the purpose of fully
implementing v3.   Any input or ideas?

 

-J

Re: more persistence layer questions

[Kurt T Stam <ku...@gmail.com>]

I think the idea was to use the v2 schema as the starting point and then 
adapt it for v3 requirements. So I think it's great to keep this change 
list somewhere on the wiki and update the model as needed.

--Kurt

Jeff Faath wrote:
>
> Have a couple more questions regarding the persistence layer.  
> Actually, I think they're all related.  As you know, I'm trying to map 
> API objects generated from the v3 schema to the persistence layer.  
> However, the persistence layer in many instances seems to be built 
> from the v2 structures.  Are we doing this to maintain backwards 
> compatibility?  Here are the discrepancies I've located so far:
>
>  
>
> 1)      The "operator" and "authorizedName" properties on 
> BusinessEntity and TModel no longer exist in v3 but are in the 
> persistence layer objects.
>
>  
>
> 2)      CategoryBags now allow one to group KeyedReference groups in a 
> KeyedReferenceGroup structure which refers to a TModel.  There is no 
> way to persist this structure in the model.
>
>  
>
> 3)      The Tmodel entity in the persistence layer seems incorrect.  
> There's no reference to an OverviewDoc and in fact in v3, there should 
> be a collection of OverviewDocs.  There's a TmodelOverview class, but 
> I don't see it referenced anywhere.  I also see a collection of 
> TmodelDocDescr, which is presumably the  OverviewDoc descriptions?  
> Anyway, I think some work needs to be done here.
>
>  
>
> 4)      Contacts allow a collection of personNames in v3 as opposed to 
> just the one provided by the model.
>
>  
>
> As stated before, it may be that our objective is to keep the data 
> structure as close to that of the v2 release as possible.  If so, I 
> can try to work around the mappings, however that seems to defeat the 
> purpose of fully implementing v3.   Any input or ideas?
>
>  
>
> -J
>