[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-1410?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15947758#comment-15947758
 ] 

Deirdre Clyne commented on ATLAS-1410:
--------------------------------------

Hi Stefhan, I was interested in your idea of a "has-an" relationship. Using 
your example of a house, a house could "has an" color, occupants, construction 
type, lot type, power source type and so many other things. There is probably a 
nearly infinite list of things you could relate to a concept using this 
relationship. 

I wonder if another way to look at this is that a occupant is a role or 
relationship played by the concept of person or customer. So, the underlying 
customer goes somewhere else and takes on a new relationship of occupier to a 
new house if the original house somehow "disappears". The other examples I came 
up with are all reference data types that would exist independently in the 
glossary anyway. 

I'm not sure if there is an implicit desire here to stick to pre-defined 
relationships and if this approach might encourage too many custom 
relationships. 


> V2 Glossary API
> ---------------
>
>                 Key: ATLAS-1410
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-1410
>             Project: Atlas
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: David Radley
>            Assignee: David Radley
>         Attachments: Atlas Glossary V2 proposal v1.0.pdf, Atlas Glossary V2 
> proposal v1.1.pdf, Atlas Glossary V2 proposal v1.2.pdf, Atlas Glossary V2 
> proposal v1.3.pdf
>
>
> The BaseResourceDefinition uses the AttributeDefintion class from typesystem. 
> There are newer more funcitonal versions of this capability in the atlas-intg 
> project. This Jira is changing over the glossary implementation to the newer 
> entity / type classes.  
> Instread of the instanceProperties and collectionProperties in the 
> BaseResourceDefintions we should use something in this sort of style :  
> "
>  AtlasEntityDef deptTypeDef =
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createClassTypeDef(DEPARTMENT_TYPE, 
> "Department"+_description, ImmutableSet.<String>of(),
>                         AtlasTypeUtil.createRequiredAttrDef("name", "string"),
>                         new AtlasAttributeDef("employees", 
> String.format("array<%s>", "Person"), true,
>                                 AtlasAttributeDef.Cardinality.SINGLE, 0, 1, 
> false, false,
>                                 
> Collections.<AtlasStructDef.AtlasConstraintDef>emptyList()));
>         AtlasEntityDef personTypeDef = 
> AtlasTypeUtil.createClassTypeDef("Person", "Person"+_description, 
> ImmutableSet.<String>of(),
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createRequiredAttrDef("name", "string"),
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("address", "Address"),
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("birthday", "date"),
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("hasPets", "boolean"),
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("numberOfCars", "byte"),
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("houseNumber", "short"),
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("carMileage", "int"),
>                 AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("age", "float"),
> "
> For the parent child relationships with glossary categories and terms we 
> should be able to have the type system manage edge deletion. As part of this, 
> we will need to investigate whether we could get rid of the disconnect and 
> connect methods added in ATLAS-1186 
>  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Reply via email to