Yes, I agree that single/multi is a good choice. Most easy to understand. I cannot think of any other options. It is either working with one object or all object of a property. Anything else seems too complicated to me.
Tom W dniu wtorek, 16 czerwca 2020 00:12:52 UTC+2 użytkownik Holger Knublauch napisał: > > > On 15/06/2020 19:48, Tomasz Pluskiewicz wrote: > > > W dniu poniedziałek, 15 czerwca 2020 01:57:10 UTC+2 użytkownik Holger > Knublauch napisał: >> >> Yes, I agree this is needed. I had started doing this for *viewers*, see >> dash:ValueTableViewer. But there is no symmetric concept for editors. I >> have used the term "aggregate viewers" so we could call them "aggregate >> editors" too. I have no strong opinion - do you prefer "compound"? >> > > Not strongly, but I think I do prefer the word compound in both cases. > > Aggregation is to combine multiple values into one. Like SUM(), AVG() in > query languages. > > Compound means composed of multiple part which I think better describes > the true nature > > >> Also I guess we could introduce a marker property to indicate (in the RDF >> model) that such widgets have a different meaning that other, single-valued >> ones. What about dash:aggregator true or dash:compound true as a flag? >> > > Maybe they deserve a separate type. > `dash:AggregateEditor`/`dash:CompoundEditor`? > > In that case I guess we should clean up the inheritance hierarchy, e.g. > > dash:Widget > dash:Viewer > dash:SingleViewer > dash:MultiViewer > dash:Editor > dash:SingleEditor > dash:MultiEditor > > which also naturally solves the naming issue? > > Would there be any other siblings to Single/Multi, i.e. any other > dimensions to categorize by? > > Holger > > > > My understanding is that they are quite different from the per-value > editors: > > 1. only matched against the property (+ maybe all values) but not on every > value individually > 2. thus, only one compound editor is shown for the entire property > 3. possibly would update the graph differently, by replacing all property > objects but that is up to the implementation I suppose > > >> Holger >> > >> On 12/06/2020 20:55, Tomasz Pluskiewicz wrote: >> >> I notice a little asymmetry in the editor/viewer widgets. >> >> I would like to suggest adding a "compound editor". Such an editor would >> apply to the property and all of its values. An example of such an editor >> would be a multi-select combobox. >> >> Tom >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/a36d83f7-741a-4db8-8f95-498ba5d635f8o%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/a36d83f7-741a-4db8-8f95-498ba5d635f8o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TopBraid Suite Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/1b72b635-aeb2-4798-8263-b8cf5c691358o%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/1b72b635-aeb2-4798-8263-b8cf5c691358o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/0c87b7df-8bfd-4b2f-beea-7e0e6dba5ff8o%40googlegroups.com.
