I agree that ideally it could be inherited from the parent node type if not specified. That would indeed be my opinion.
Small quibble: the fact that it's called "Standard" is arbitrary. The interface name does *not* have to conform to the interface type, it's just what they decided for the normative Root node type. The name does *not* contain type information. For example, in your own node type you can override the interface named "Standard" to be of a different interface type, which does not have "Standard" in its name. (ARIA will insist that your overriding type inherits from the Standard node type -- see our other discussion about type inheritance.) On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:32 PM, DeWayne Filppi <[email protected]> wrote: > Seems rather ugly. Do you have an opinion? If I specify that I'm using > the Standard interface, what point is there in the "type" field? > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Tal Liron <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I mentioned this to you in the previous thread: the "type" field is > > required for interface definitions according to TOSCA syntax. So, even if > > it's the same as what you are inheriting, you must specify it. > > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:04 PM, DeWayne Filppi <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Now that the 'subclassing' problem has been resolved, overriding > > interface > > > methods is breaking. Simple example: > > > > > > tosca_definitions_version: tosca_simple_yaml_1_0 > > > > > > imports: > > > > > > - aria-1.0 > > > > > > node_types: > > > > > > T1: > > > derived_from: tosca.nodes.Root > > > interfaces: > > > Standard: > > > create: > > > implementation: > > > primary: i1.sh > > > delete: > > > implementation: > > > primary: i1.sh > > > > > > The error, using Aria in the ARIA-1 branch: > > > > > > Validation issues: > > > 2: required field "type" in > > > "aria_extension_tosca.simple_v1_0.definitions.InterfaceDefinition" > does > > > not > > > have a value > > > > > >
