From: Peter MATTHEWS (matthews_at_melbpc.org.au)
Date: Fri Jul 19 2002 - 08:01:28 CEST
Return-Path: <owner-cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch> Delivered-To: cavexml-archive_at_cartography.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 46A0615934 for <cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 28) id 46D5F15919; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:14 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id DC2B315941 for <cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 96) id 1965615924; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:05 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 29AED1594E for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay1.melbpc.org.au (newglider.melbpc.org.au [203.12.152.9]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 3B8931591B for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:32:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.melbpc.org.au (localhost.melbpc.org.au [127.0.0.1]) by relay1.melbpc.org.au (8.12.5/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6JAGCft042053 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:16:12 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from matthews_at_melbpc.org.au) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:01:28 +1000 From: Peter MATTHEWS <matthews_at_melbpc.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20020718115652.C895E8B22_at_karmail.ethz.ch> Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.1.20020719154123.01d4a150@popa.melbpc.org.au> Received: from relay1.melbpc.org.au (localhost.melbpc.org.au [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.melbpc.org.au (AvMailGate-2.0.0.6) id 42006-4AE90C7F; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:15:42 +1000 Received: from peter.melbpc.org.au (a2-32.melbpc.org.au [203.12.157.32]) by relay1.melbpc.org.au (8.12.5/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6JAFZS6041996 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:15:41 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from matthews_at_melbpc.org.au) References: <5.1.0.14.1.20020717170732.01d58d00_at_popa.melbpc.org.au> Subject: Re: Comments on the data model To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 X-Sender: matthews_at_popa.melbpc.org.au X-Loop: cavexml Sender: owner-cavexml_at_karmail.ethz.ch Precedence: bulk Reply-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11
At 06:49 18-07-02 -0400, Richard Knapp wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 17:44:22 +1000, Peter MATTHEWS wrote:
>
> > At 18:27 10-07-02 -0400, Richard Knapp wrote:
> > [snip]
> > >Under Branch, there is a field of Node type however, Node is an
> Element not
> > >an attribute.
> >
> > The fields shown under Branch are actually called "node names", i.e. the
> > names of the Nodes which terminate/define each end of the Branch. These
> > names are therefore properties of the Branch.
>
>Are the names unique to the system? How will that be ensured? If IDs
>are used, how will their uniqueness be ensured? If multiple files are
>joined - a previously unrelated cave was connected - how will the
>uniqueness transfer into the newly joined files?
This sort of thing will be worked out when we come to it as we work through
the diagram.
[snip]
> > In the diagram, I have shown [cavesystem] as the top of the hierarchy -
> > [caves] are within [cavesystem], and [projects] are within [cavesystem].
>
>So Cave and Project are at the same level, or can there be a project
>within a cave as well? What if there is no cavesystem, I'm just
>working on a cave (most likely scenario)? Wouldn't the highest level
>be the document? (in XML, the root element - CaveXML; in RDBBS, the
>database). From that can spawn a Project consisting of multiple caves
>or a cave system with multiple caves and projects or a cave with
>multiple projects or....
As I said in the web page preamble, in any particular case you would only
use the entities which applied to your situation. The diagram aims to show
the lot, so you can see how they would fit in if you used them.
The diagram is descriptive, not prescriptive. Its purpose is to help our
discussions. Similarly the definitions are only drafts, but hopefully are
an internally consistent and coherent set as a starting point for our
discussions.
Peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 31 2002 - 23:00:00 CEST