Hi All,

On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Dan Haywood
<[email protected]>wrote:

> I think I like Oscar's a bit more, also.
>
> Qn: Why is there a 1:1 relationship between Reputation and ReputationValue?
>
> ReputationValue entity encapsulates the result of the reputation analysis
process.
It can simply be a value type (a reputation score). And I think each
Reputation object should have a corresponding reputation value, that's why
I added it as a 1:1 relationship. Any ideas for a better model?


>
>
>
>
> On 4 April 2014 17:08, GESCONSULTOR - Óscar Bou <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Hi Dileepa.
>>
>> Not sure about this, but seems a little "strange" the "cycle" on your
>> model between the Context, Criteria and Reputation entities.
>>
>> Perhaps the Context is a more generic entity than Criteria, and it's the
>> Criteria what should have a relationship with a Context, and also with
>> Reputation?
>>
>> I agree with you on the cyclic model being bit strange. I also adjusted
the association between ReputationValue and Criteria entitys as
[ReputationValue]0..*-1>[Criteria] so that now ReputationValue has a
uni-direction association to the criteria used for the computation.

See : http://yuml.me/17514278

Something like this:
>>
>> http://yuml.me/3aa65a6f
>>
>> HTH,
>>
>> Oscar
>>
>>
>>
>> El 04/04/2014, a las 17:56, Dileepa Jayakody <[email protected]>
>> escribió:
>>
>> Hi Oscar and all,
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 1:52 PM, GESCONSULTOR - Óscar Bou <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Deleepa,
>>>
>>> Seeing at your last diagram, shouldn't the Criteria be related with (is
>>> specific to) a Context? If so, a relationship would also be needed.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I agree. The criteria to calculate reputation depends on the
>> context. Therefore there should be a relationship
>> [Context]1-1..*>[Criteria].
>> I have modified the diagram like this : http://yuml.me/26953ad7
>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps the Computation Algorithm could also be specific for one or more
>>> Contexts. In that case, a relationship is also needed.
>>>
>>
>> I think, now that Context has a relationship with Criteria, the
>> relationship between the ComputationAlgo and Context could be derived
>> through the Criteria entity.
>>
>>>
>>> Also, perhaps the relationship between Reputation and Criteria is
>>> redundant, as it can be obtained through the ReputationValue. It could be
>>> modeled as a derived relationship in Isis.
>>>
>>> Yes, Thanks for pointing out. Removed this relationship between
>> Reputation and Criteria
>>
>>> HTH,
>>>
>>> Oscar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> El 03/04/2014, a las 09:59, Dileepa Jayakody <[email protected]>
>>> escribió:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Dan and all,
>>>
>>> I modified the diagram and the latest is : http://yuml.me/75c87f26
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Dileepa Jayakody <
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Dan,
>>>
>>> I will modify the diagram with proper notations and reply with
>>> explanations..
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Dan Haywood <
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2 April 2014 08:09, Dileepa Jayakody <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> After doing some background reading on Reputation object modeling [1],
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (good to hear)
>>>
>>>
>>> I
>>> have extended my class diagram to describe the reputation analysis
>>>
>>> model in
>>>
>>> my application : http://yuml.me/c97453ec
>>>
>>>
>>> There are some discrepancies between this diagram and the description
>>> below...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> An entity
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not sure if having an entity called "entity" is a particularly good idea;
>>> could get confusing...
>>>
>>>
>>> has a reputation
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The diagram shows the "entity" entity as having many reputations.
>>>
>>> An entity can have different reputations in different contexts. As an
>>>
>>> example entity might have a good reputation for email context but bad
>>> reputation for marketing context.
>>> Hence, [Reputation]1-1[Context] and [<<Entity>>]1-0..*[Reputation]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> which describes it's value. EmailContact, Email
>>> are the 2 entity objects in my application.
>>>
>>>
>>> The diagram shows EmailContact and Email as having (an association with)
>>> an
>>> "entity", rather than being (implementing) entity.  But I think the
>>> latter
>>> is probably what you want; Entity is an interface and EmailContact and
>>> Email implement them.
>>>
>>> Yep, I wanted to show the inheritance relationship. Sorry for the mistake
>>>
>>> with notation. I have modified this in the latest diagram.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Reputation is an interface implemented by ReputationObject class.
>>>
>>>
>>> The diagram doesn't show this, it shows an association.
>>>
>>> In yuml.me, think that is shown using RepuationObject -^ Reputation
>>>
>>> Also, ReputationObject isn't a particular great name.  Why have
>>> Reputation
>>> as an interface at all; as I understand it there's likely only one impl.
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree. I  removed ReputationObject and  added Reputation as an entity
>>> in
>>> the diagram.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Reputation has a particular context/domain in which it isearned
>>>
>>> (eCommerce,
>>>
>>> films, technical forums etc ),
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Reputation *->1 Context
>>>
>>>
>>> in this case the context is email
>>> communication. The reputation's value is represented by the
>>>
>>> ReputationValue
>>>
>>> object which is calculated based on a certain criteria (In my case the
>>> criteria are People associated with the email, topic and actions in the
>>> email). Criteria defines the required parameters and the
>>> ComputationAlgorithm to be used to calculate reputation value.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The reputation value is calculated by the particular
>>>
>>> ComputationAlgorithm
>>>
>>> using the parameters given by the criteria. This is where the
>>> implementation specific stuff comes in for calculation. Mahout
>>> recommendation algorithms, Drools rules are implementations of such
>>> ComputationAlgorithms.
>>>
>>>
>>> From an implementation standpoint, my first pass would be to implement
>>> ComputationAlgorithm as an enum.  That way it can be polymorphically
>>> dispatched to.
>>>
>>> Overall, I like the way that the domain is getting richer.  But I do
>>> still
>>> worry pragmatically about where these entities are all to be persisted,
>>> and
>>> how to they are sync'ed.  Perhaps you could extend the diagram and use
>>> stereotypes to indicate for each entity whether its native persistence is
>>> in Isis, or Mahout, or gmail, or somewhere else.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I will design the persistence model and we can discuss over that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Could also indicate if types are entities or value types.
>>>
>>> HTH
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] Adrian Paschke, Rehab Alnemr, Christoph Meinel, The Rule Responder
>>> Distributed Reputation Management System for the Semantic Web
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Dileepa
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Óscar Bou Bou
>>> Responsable de Producto
>>> Auditor Jefe de Certificación ISO 27001 en BSI
>>> CISA, CRISC, APMG ISO 20000, ITIL-F
>>>
>>>     902 900 231 / 620 267 520
>>>    http://www.twitter.com/oscarbou
>>>
>>>    http://es.linkedin.com/in/oscarbou
>>>
>>>    http://www.GesConsultor.com <http://www.gesconsultor.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Este mensaje y los ficheros anexos son confidenciales. Los mismos
>>> contienen información reservada que no puede ser difundida. Si usted ha
>>> recibido este correo por error, tenga la amabilidad de eliminarlo de su
>>> sistema y avisar al remitente mediante reenvío a su dirección electrónica;
>>> no deberá copiar el mensaje ni divulgar su contenido a ninguna persona.
>>> Su dirección de correo electrónico junto a sus datos personales constan
>>> en un fichero titularidad de Gesdatos Software, S.L. cuya finalidad es la
>>> de mantener el contacto con Ud. Si quiere saber de qué información
>>> disponemos de Ud., modificarla, y en su caso, cancelarla, puede hacerlo
>>> enviando un escrito al efecto, acompañado de una fotocopia de su D.N.I. a
>>> la siguiente dirección: Gesdatos Software, S.L. , Paseo de la Castellana,
>>> 153 bajo - 28046 (Madrid), y Avda. Cortes Valencianas num. 50, 1ºC - 46015
>>> (Valencia). Asimismo, es su responsabilidad comprobar que este mensaje o
>>> sus archivos adjuntos no contengan virus informáticos, y en caso que los
>>> tuvieran eliminarlos.
>>>
>>
>>
>> *Óscar Bou Bou*
>> Responsable de Producto
>> Auditor Jefe de Certificación ISO 27001 en BSI
>> CISA, CRISC, APMG ISO 20000, ITIL-F
>>
>>    902 900 231 / 620 267 520
>>    http://www.twitter.com/oscarbou
>>
>>    http://es.linkedin.com/in/oscarbou
>>
>>    http://www.GesConsultor.com <http://www.gesconsultor.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> Este mensaje y los ficheros anexos son confidenciales. Los mismos
>> contienen información reservada que no puede ser difundida. Si usted ha
>> recibido este correo por error, tenga la amabilidad de eliminarlo de su
>> sistema y avisar al remitente mediante reenvío a su dirección electrónica;
>> no deberá copiar el mensaje ni divulgar su contenido a ninguna persona.
>> Su dirección de correo electrónico junto a sus datos personales constan
>> en un fichero titularidad de Gesdatos Software, S.L. cuya finalidad es la
>> de mantener el contacto con Ud. Si quiere saber de qué información
>> disponemos de Ud., modificarla, y en su caso, cancelarla, puede hacerlo
>> enviando un escrito al efecto, acompañado de una fotocopia de su D.N.I. a
>> la siguiente dirección: Gesdatos Software, S.L. , Paseo de la Castellana,
>> 153 bajo - 28046 (Madrid), y Avda. Cortes Valencianas num. 50, 1ºC - 46015
>> (Valencia). Asimismo, es su responsabilidad comprobar que este mensaje o
>> sus archivos adjuntos no contengan virus informáticos, y en caso que los
>> tuvieran eliminarlos.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to