It would be nice to be able to specify the types of validations to be performed in an ontology. It would make it easier for systems to share a common, verifiable definition for a value. This would satisfy the DRY rule across applications, APIs, companies, etc. But that's perhaps a little beyond the scope of the thread.
Cheers, Mark On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]>wrote: > I'd have to disagree. For constraints you're much better doing it in the > type system, where the compiler can check things for you. > > e.g. Provide an argument of type ValidatedId instead of a String with a > bunch of annotations. > > I'm also curious to see if the new 'Optional' type gets much adoption vs > @NotNull and friends, despite its limitations. > On 16 Apr 2013 21:53, "Fabrizio Giudici" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:11:04 +0200, Mark Fortner <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Roland, >>> We have a similar problem in the bioinformatics world, where a field like >>> "id" could mean an ID from a specific database, an accession (an >>> alphanumeric ID similar to a database ID). One way around this is to use >>> semantic annotations for fields. Here's an example. >>> http://aspenbio.wordpress.com/**2011/01/20/biogroovy-and-the-** >>> semantic-web/<http://aspenbio.wordpress.com/2011/01/20/biogroovy-and-the-semantic-web/> >>> >> >> RDF is great for interoperability; for readability in general cases, it's >> still good but requires that the reader knows it. >> >> Generally speaking, annotations can be good for specifying constraints, >> pre/post conditions, and improve readability in a easy way. In its small >> garden, for instance, things such as @NonNull are simple, intuitive and >> deliver some added value. >> >> >> -- >> Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect @ Tidalwave s.a.s. >> "We make Java work. Everywhere." >> http://tidalwave.it/fabrizio/**blog <http://tidalwave.it/fabrizio/blog>- >> [email protected] >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Java Posse" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to >> javaposse+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<javaposse%[email protected]> >> . >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/**group/javaposse?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en> >> . >> For more options, visit >> https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out> >> . >> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Java Posse" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
