On 06/06/2011 09:57 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: > Here is a "new" proposal: > * introduce now class property references with > "wiki:space.page^property" in which we escape "^" and "." when > serializing the "property" > * that way if later we really need to have several classes by document > (which does not actually bring anything I agree with Denis) we support > wiki:space.page^property as a shortcut of > wiki:space.page^firstclass.property. It would be a first but it's not > hard to do technically. If we don't for sure we can always remove the > "." escaping which is just a useless escaping which is supported > properly by reference parser and otherwise we don't really break the > syntax by adding the classname part to the reference since the > separator is already protected. > > WDYT ?
+1. Not sure if "first" is correct, since this is supposed to be a set of classes, not a list, but yes, without specifying a class name, the main class in that document will be used. > I really need to move on on this and I'm -1 to introduce right now a > wiki:space.page^classname.property syntax where you never know what to > put as classname. > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 14:24, Denis Gervalle<[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 00:29, Vincent Massol<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On May 30, 2011, at 9:57 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: >>> >>>> On 05/30/2011 09:25 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: >>>>> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 21:11, Thomas Mortagne >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Hi dev, >>>>>> >>>>>> I would like to introduce class property entity type and related >>>>>> reference and syntax separator. >>>>>> >>>>>> For the separator syntax I propose to use the same thing as object >>>>>> separator since you can't have both in the same reference and it's >>>>>> always a pain to find a new separator. >>>>> >>>>> FYI it means wiki:space.page^property >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Note that I'm inly talking about class property and not class since >>>>>> class reference is exactly the same thing as document reference I >>>>>> don't think we really need to have a specific one. >>>> >>>> Currently there can be only one class in a document, but for a while the >>>> question whether this is going to be valid in the future as well has >>>> been floating around. >>>> >>>> So, a prerequisite vote is: >>>> >>>> In the new model, can a document contain more than one class? >>> >>> I don't think we should limit ourselves (I don't see any reason, do you see >>> one?). BTW the new model I started has the ability to have several classes >>> per document. >>> >> >> I agree that we should not limit ourselves, but I really do not see the >> limit here. What would be the advantage of having several class defined in >> the same document ? >> >> Denis >> >> >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Vincent >>> >>>> One thing I believe we're definitely going to need is a special data >>>> structure to explicitly represent XClasses, holding XClass metadata such >>>> as "is the class supposed to be stand-alone, one instance per document, >>>> like BlogPosts, or is it an aggregated class, with several instances >>>> attached to a document, like the Comments"; "what is the sheet used to >>>> display the object in view mode"; "what is the parent class (if we want >>>> to do inheritance)". With this meta-class in place, we could, in theory, >>>> have two meta-classes in a document, with each class property mapped to >>>> one of the meta-classes. >>>> >>>>>> WDYT ? >>>> >>>> +1, if we decide that we only want at most one class per document. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
