From: Richard Knapp (richfk_at_attglobal.net)
Date: Fri Jul 19 2002 - 17:38:35 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 8E19E8A99 for <cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 17:52:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 28) id 429AD8A78; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 17:52:28 +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 EEFB28A99 for <cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 17:52:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 96) id D2A907EA9; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 17:52:24 +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 6D7388A99 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 17:52:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from prserv.net (out1.prserv.net [32.97.166.31]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id D10EA7D89 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 17:52:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from Muphin (slip-12-65-30-133.mis.prserv.net[12.65.30.133]) by prserv.net (out1) with SMTP id <2002071915352620105jco8ge>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:35:26 +0000 From: "Richard Knapp" <richfk_at_attglobal.net> To: "CaveXML" <cavexml_at_cartography.ch> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 11:38:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: PMMail 2.20.2380 for OS/2 Warp 4.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Cave/CaveSystem/Project/Survey element/entity Message-Id: <20020719155221.D10EA7D89@karmail.ethz.ch> 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
In the proposed diagram, there are four fairly high level items:
Cave, CaveSystem, Project, and Survey. Each can contain bits of the
other. This makes figuring out which is the top element (which
element can only contain other elements and not be contained)
difficult.
However, are these really distinct items or the same with different
names. Yes, there are some things a Cave can have that a Survey
cannot (depending on whose model you choose). But, for the most part,
those differences can be generalized.
Instead of having these four different items (and this may apply in
other situations), would it be better to provide for a generic
grouping method? What if there was a Grouping item that could be of
different categories. (This is similar to the Measurement item
proposed by Peter.) Some of the categories could be Cave, CaveSystem
(or System), Survey, Project, Plot (for land survey), Mine or ? It
could contain instances of itself since these items can be nested in
various ways.
(as per the documentation on 6.1)
Definition:
Grouping - A generic term to allow the grouping data into an orderly
structure as defined by the user. Grouping could be done at a high or
low level. For instance, Trips could be grouped into a Survey,
Surveys into a Cave, Caves into a System. Or for non-cave data, Trips
could be grouped into Plots, Job, or Farms. Each grouping can be
assigned a category to delineate the level used and a name to
identify it.
"ERD"
[Grouping]
- could contain other [Grouping]s
- has a category
- could have a name
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 31 2002 - 23:00:01 CEST