| Re: [mdt-papyrus.dev] EMF-Facet refactoring and Papyrus Table |
|
Hello, I’m not favorable to a new file, as most Papyrus tools expect exactly three files (x.di, x.notation and x.uml). This would involve a lot of maintenance on these tools to take a new (and probably
optional) kind of file. The notation would probably become optional as well, as we could have a model with only tables. It seems really too complicated, and the added value is not obvious. The notation file is probably the best place for storing the table models. Regards, __________________________ Camille Letavernier +33 (0)1 69 08 00 59 -
camille.letavernier@xxxxxx CEA LIST - Laboratoire d'Ingénierie dirigée par les modèles pour les Systèmes Embarqués (LISE) De : mdt-papyrus.dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mdt-papyrus.dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
De la part de LORENZO Vincent Hi all, As you know, EMF-Facet is finishing its refactoring. They provide new metamodels for Facet, Queries, Table, Customization, …
Of course, these API are always available in Juno, but they are deprecated. Concerning the Papyrus Table, I should create a new papyrus table metamodel to use the new EMF-Facet metamodels. I should create new table editors too to use this
new table model. My question is the following : In which file should we store the table ? Currently it is done in the .di, but it seems me that it would be better in the .notation or in a new file. Best regards, --
Vincent Lorenzo 01-69-08-17-24 CEA Saclay Nano-INNOV Institut CARNOT CEA LIST DILS/LISE Point Courrier n° 174 91 191 Gif sur Yvette CEDEX |