[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [mdt-bpmn2.dev] ItemDefinition and structureRef
- From: "Hille-Doering, Reiner" <reiner.hille-doering@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 13:56:00 +0200
- Accept-language: de-DE
- Acceptlanguage: de-DE
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Thread-index: AcyKXJzJeJGzSxivQ3OSfr585fU3GQACf5Bw
- Thread-topic: [mdt-bpmn2.dev] ItemDefinition and structureRef
> So (for example) someone wanting to use BPMN2 to describe a manual business process,
> they would currently be forced to create XML schema for all of the physical items
> that are passed around as part of their process.
No, the reference is not mandatory and could be simply null.
Or again, it could point to some private EObject. Or even contain a String that EMF will consider as Proxy URI.
> Just wondering whether it is better for the model to expose the QName,
> and then provide utilities to help applications resolve the reference
> where relevant (i.e. where kind is information)?
I think the opposite is better. Keep a normal EObject reference
and provide something as the sample code below as
Utility for the case that you want to "encode"/"decode" some special strings
in the Proxy URI:
ItemDefinition item = Bpmn2Factory.eINSTANCE.createItemDefinition();
InternalEObject value = new DynamicEObjectImpl();
final URI uri = URI.createURI("test.abc#id");
>> It could be a reference to an XSD complex type or Element.
>> But it could also be a reference to any proprietary Data structure
>> containing any kind of information.
>> For the EMF model it means that it could point to an EObject from a
>> private class, e.g. containing some strings.
>> We had a similar discussion on the list some time ago. See here:
>> There is even an example, how you could but a string into the
>> structureRef property using the EOject proxyURI.