Hi Tal I found the magic statement in 3.5.8.1.1 Yes the reflected attribute name must be the same as the property name for the reflection feature. Now I understand your second point. Thanks for your patience.
Why do you think it is a bad feature? Property is the desired value while reflected attribute is the actual value. It seems logical to show actual value. Or are you saying the actual value will always be the same as the desired value and the reflected attribute is useless? -Steve -----Original Message----- From: Tal Liron [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 3:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Attribute and Property Reflection The reflection feature is mentioned very, very briefly in just that one sentence in the spec. They is no mention of changing names, so I am expecting that the attribute names would be identical to the property names. In that case, there would be a conflict if an attribute has the same name as a property -- otherwise how would the property be reflected? That's why I'm assuming that for this to work we should not allow an attribute name to override a property name. My preferred solution is not to add any custom prefixes in ARIA, because they would not be portable The TOSCA spec has many authors, and it would be hard to track down the particular one who wrote this sentence... Personally, I think this is an awful and unclear feature. On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Steve Baillargeon < [email protected]> wrote: > Back 1 step please. > Are you saying that attribute names and property names within a Type > MUST be different? > As far as I know they can be the same e.g. <attribute_name_1> = > <property_name 1> > > attributes: > <attribute_name_1>: > type:string > properties: > <property_name 1>: > type:string > > > Back to reflection. > I am proposing <attribute_name> = actual_<property_name> But I think > it is best if I ask further clarification from YAML Profile authors. > What do you think? > What is your preferred solution? > > -Steve > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tal Liron [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 3:15 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Attribute and Property Reflection > > Steve, we cannot change the TOSCA spec, and the spec does not say > anything about naming conventions here. > > I think, though, that an obvious part of this JIRA will be to emit an > error if an attribute name is the same as a property name, because > obviously this would break this feature. > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Steve Baillargeon < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > I see the following text in the JIRA: > > According to the TOSCA 1.0 spec, property value should be 'exposed', > > with the same name, as attributes. > > > > Does the spec really say to use the same name? As far as I know it > > does not. > > What about using a better reflected attribute naming convention like > > “actual_<property_name>”? > > Can I add this to the JIRA? > > > > -Steve B > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tal Liron [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:48 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Attribute and Property Reflection > > > > Not right now, but there is an open JIRA to support it. > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Steve Baillargeon < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi > > > Does ARIA support "attribute and property reflection" defined in > > 3.5.10.1? > > > > > > Regards > > > Steve B > > > > > > > > >
