Hi all,
I have just had a chat with Graham. we are thinking that we should go with 
relationships as the top level name. We also think we could helpfully add 
in the related entity in the new class like this: 

class AtlasRelationshipObjectId  {
   AtlasObjectId relatedEntity; 
   String relationshipGuid;
   AtlasStruct relationshipAttributes; 
}

I think this gives us the best of both worlds, 
           regards David. 





From:   Graham Wallis <graham_wal...@uk.ibm.com>
To:     dev@atlas.apache.org
Cc:     Madhan Neethiraj <mneethi...@hortonworks.com>, Sarath Subramanian 
<sar...@apache.org> 
Date:   24/07/2017 09:58
Subject:        Re: Relationship attributes



Personally I think 'relatedEntities' is clearer.

Best regards,
  Graham

Graham Wallis
IBM Analytics Emerging Technology Center
Internet: graham_wal...@uk.ibm.com 
IBM Laboratories, Hursley Park, Hursley, Hampshire SO21 2JN
Tel: +44-1962-815356    Tie: 7-245356




From:   Madhan Neethiraj <mad...@apache.org>
To:     "dev@atlas.apache.org" <dev@atlas.apache.org>, Sarath Subramanian 
<sar...@apache.org>
Date:   24/07/2017 09:04
Subject:        Re: Relationship attributes
Sent by:        Madhan Neethiraj <mneethi...@hortonworks.com>



Current name of ‘relationshipAttributes’ makes sense looking from an 
entity point-of-view – it distinguishes regular-attributes of an entity 
from attributes injected by relationships. However, given that 
relationships can themselves might have attributes, it can be confusing.

I was going to suggest ‘relatedEntities’; but ‘relationships’ seems to be 
good choice.

+1 for naming the field as ‘relationships’.

Thanks,
Madhan


On 7/24/17, 12:53 AM, "David Radley" <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> wrote:

    Hi Sarath,
    Great, personally for the Entity's current relationshipAttributes, I 
    prefer relationships as it is simpler - is there a reason you need 
    attribute in the name?
         all the best, David. 
 
 
 
    From:   Sarath Subramanian <sar...@apache.org>
    To:     dev@atlas.apache.org
    Cc:     Madhan Neethiraj <mad...@apache.org>
    Date:   24/07/2017 07:09
    Subject:        Re: Relationship attributes
 
 
 
    Hi David,
 
    I agree with using the term 'relationship attributes' for attributes 
of
    relationship, I suggest we use "relatedAttributes" for relationship
    attributes of entity.
 
 
    Thanks,
    Sarath Subramanian
 
    On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 2:22 AM, David Radley 
<david_rad...@uk.ibm.com>
    wrote:
 
    > Hi Madhan,
    > When I see the phrase 'relationship attributes', I am never quite 
sure
    > whether we are referring to the attributes of an entity that relate 
to
    > another entity or the attributes of the relationship instance 
itself. I
    > think the phrase ' relationship attributes' more naturally fits as 
the
    > attributes of the relationship itself; we are using it in the other 
    sense.
    >
    > I suggest we change the relationshipAttributes in the entity to
    > relationships (if you really want attributes in the name we could 
call 
    it
    > relatingAttributes)- and use the term 'relationship attributes' 
purely 
    for
    > the attributes of the relationship itself. What do you think?
    >                 all the best, David.
    > Unless stated otherwise above:
    > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with 
number
    > 741598.
    > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire 
PO6 
    3AU
    >
 
 
 
    Unless stated otherwise above:
    IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with 
number 
    741598. 
    Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 

3AU
 




Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU




Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

Reply via email to