RE: [higgins-dev] IdAS: Model as Metadata

["Paul Trevithick" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Greg wrote:
> 
> I have to say I'm also not 100% sold on model as metadata.  It strikes
> me as the same discussion we had about whether metadata is just a set of
> attributes.  Yes, but there's a semantic difference that might be
> important to the consumer.  If I just said, "give me all the metadata
> about DigitalSubject X", I don't think I would expect to see the model
> of that type of DS.

...we were in agreement with you on #higgins today
> 
> Would it help to simply extend IProperty to IModel (in the same way that
> we did for IMetadata)?  Then all the update methods would be inherited,
> but we'd still have a different interface to convey the semantic
> difference.

...Valery and Jim are looking into this
> 
> ...Greg
> 
> 
> Valery Kokhan wrote:
> > Hi Jim,
> >
> > I see one problem with intention to represent interfaces in .model
> > package using metadata.
> >
> > As you mentioned, metadata is a data that describes another data but I
> > have to notice that actually they describes data instances while
> > interfaces in the .model package describes data structures
> > (definitions).
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev