Issue Details (XML | Word | Printable)

Key: CMIS-45
Type: Bug Bug
Status: Closed Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: Major Major
Assignee: Ethan Gur-esh
Reporter: Florent Guillaume
Watchers: 1
Operations

If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
OASIS Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) TC

"base type" vs "root type"

Created: 22/Feb/09 11:42 AM   Updated: 11/Jan/10 06:35 PM
Component/s: Domain Model
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: Draft 0.60

Proposal: Use BaseTypeQueryName in the spec, and replace all mentions of "root type" with "base type".
Resolution:
All mentions of "root type" replaced with "base type".
TC resolution: accepted


 Description  « Hide
The schema only speaks of BaseTypeId, baseType, baseTypeQueryName.


But the spec mentions "root type" interchangeably with "base type". In particular, it uses "RootTypeQueryName" where the schema uses "baseTypeQueryName".


This should be made coherent.

 All   Comments   Change History      Sort Order: Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Al Brown added a comment - 23/Feb/09 01:35 PM
Agreed with the proposal to update spec to use BaseType.

David Caruana added a comment - 02/Mar/09 06:45 PM
As I understand there are six concepts:

- ObjectTypeId (repo specific)
- ParentTypeId
- BaseObjectTypeId

- ObjectTypeQueryName (spec defines values for root types e.g. Document, Folder, ...)
- ParentTypeQueryName
- BaseTypeQueryName

I would like to see the spec (Part 1) also define ObjectTypeId values for root types

This would then allow Object Type Definition to support following attributes:

- ObjectTypeId
- ParentTypeId
- BaseTypeId
- TypeQueryName

And Base Object Type to support the following properties

- ObjectTypeId
- BaseTypeId

Part 2 is then a direct serialization of above. This means Query Name must be retrieved via Type Definition (I think that's ok, as it's generally used to drive query builders). However cmis:object provides its actual type id and a known base type id that can be switched on by a client (e.g. split between item and container) without requiring retrieval of Type Definition (a common use case).

David Caruana added a comment - 03/Mar/09 11:26 AM
The above comment has now been created as a new issue CMIS-87.

Al Brown added a comment - 04/Jan/10 11:48 PM
JIRA Cleanup