[fdo-internals] FDO RFC 7 - Add New Methods to FdoClassDefinition

[Barbara Zoladek]

Frank,

It is a general sense of 'virtualness'. Something that cannot be exposed
by capabilities or other characteristics.

I'll update documentation for this RFC.

Thanks,
Barbara.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:fdo-internals-
> bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Frank Warmerdam (External)
> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 12:17 PM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] FDO RFC 7 - Add New Methods to
FdoClassDefinition
> 
> Barbara Zoladek wrote:
> > The 'view' term may be not the most fortunate because it is
immediately
> > associated with RDBMS views. It should indicate that this is a
virtual
> > object in the datastore and therefore a class mapped to that object
is
> > virtual too. And that class "virtuality" we wanted to expose. It is
not
> > only about limitation, but also about dependencies. Class B may
depend
> > on Class A, if Class B is based on the subset of data in Class A.
Class
> > B disappears when Class A is dropped.
> 
> Barbara,
> 
> Is there is intention of expressing what actual dependencies exist or
> just that "is view" indicates a general sense of virtualness?  I think
> with some expanded documentation on what virtualness means in the RFC
> (and new method docs) I'd be ok with this RFC (if still slightly
dubious).
> 
> Best regards,
> --
>
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------
------
> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
warmerdam at pobox.com
> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
> and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo,
http://osgeo.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals