That does make more sense.  Thanks for explaining it so well.

James Wennmacher - Unicon
480.558.2420

On 05/06/2015 09:43 AM, Drew Wills wrote:
> James...
>
>> On May 5, 2015, at 1:41 PM, James Wennmacher <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> I think
>>
>> <pags-group 
>> script="classpath://org/jasig/portal/io/import-pags-group_v4-1.crn">
>>   <name>Member of Students (PAGS)</name>
>>   <description>Member of Students group</description>
>>   <selection-test>
>>     <test-group>
>> <member-of-group>Students</member-of-group>
>> <not-member-of-group>Test Users</not-member-of-group>
>>     </test-group>
>>   </selection-test>
>> </pags-group>
>>
>> is great and a much cleaner solution.  I want to verify you could do 
>> something like the following:
>
> Except that (I feel) the child groups *need* to be wrapped in a <test> 
> element and the <tester-class> element *needs* to be there.  I don’t 
> want to start teaching Import/Export about specific IPersonTester 
> implementations and whether you can “infer” one or another 
> specifically based on the nature of the child elements found within 
> the <test-group>.
>
> Also, the element names “member-of-group” & “not-member-of-group” are 
> workable — that approach would be okay — but I think even better is 
> <includes> & <excludes>, here’s why…
>
> In the future we may want to create even more IPersonTester classes 
> that do new and innovative things.  For their functioning, they may 
> need some parameters in the <test> element as well.  These parameters, 
> moreover, will need to be modeled as members on 
> IPersonAttributesGroupTestDefinition and the JPA-managed 
> implementation of that interface as well… so that means (albeit minor) 
> database schema changes.  I’d like to avoid those, to the extent 
> possible, so I’d prefer to use names that are more likely to be 
> reusable in the future with other IPersonTesters.
>
> So my proposal for the XML corresponding to this example would be 
> (note the version change in the script attribute)…
>
> <pags-group 
> script="classpath://org/jasig/portal/io/import-pags-group_v4-3.crn">
>   <name>Non-Test Students</name>
>   <description>Students who are not test accounts</description>
>   <selection-test>
>     <test-group>
>       <test>
>   
> <tester-class>org.jasig.portal.groups.pags.testers.AdHocGroupTester</tester-class>
>         <includes>Students</includes>
>         <excludes>Test Users</excludes>
>       </test>
>     </test-group>
>   </selection-test>
> </pags-group>
>
> This way, furthermore, it’s clear how you combine test definitions 
> based on the AdHocGroupTester with other criteria (just as we’ve 
> always done).  This approach makes this new type of group less 
> different or weird as compared with existing groups, testers, data 
> files, documentation, Import/Export support, etc.
>
> drew
>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev


-- 
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev

Reply via email to