[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-1410?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15928083#comment-15928083 ]
David Radley commented on ATLAS-1410: ------------------------------------- Many thanks [~jonesn]. Responding to your comments for pages 6 : the intent is that a term is owned by one glossary but can be categorized by categories from any glossary. Do you think I need to be more explicit in the text about this? 7 : Very valid concerns relating to globalization, which I suggest we deal with this separately, as per my exclusions at the top of the document. We have talked of display attributes on the dev list. I have not looked into TitanDbs encoding, whether this is effected by which store is used, whether String data type in Titan supports unicode or UTF-8 and how this fits with indexes. p8 - in figure 3 "hive column" is meant to be an instance - so could be worth using an example like "employee salary" or similar to avoid confusion with type definitions. <<David agreed>>Also on this page it would be worth comparing to the v1 implementation. The association there between the column (entity) & term (trait) is the trait instance, which also carries additional information - parameters. That’s how we might capture the level of SPI, whilst I think with this new design that is done through the hierarchy of glossary terms <<David yes see figure 9>>. An example may help? or just a link to page 16. Question for other reviewers - is this sufficient (I think it's simpler, but do we lose additional attributes?) <<David what attributes do you think we are losing? We are storing attributes and potentially complex relationships in the classifying terms; which is why they exist >> 13 : yes there is scope to add new semantics relationships. I agree on your search comment 16/17 agreed. On Ranger Tag sync. I am suggesting we continue to expose classifications as tags. Now V2 Classifications are enhanced by * having a guid (as the name cannot be relied upon to be unique) * having an associated Glossary Terms, including the classifying term. I hope this is sufficient to meet the needs of tag sync; or do you think more is required? > V2 Glossary API > --------------- > > Key: ATLAS-1410 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-1410 > Project: Atlas > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: David Radley > Assignee: David Radley > Attachments: Atlas Glossary V2 proposal v1.0.pdf, Atlas Glossary V2 > proposal v1.1.pdf > > > The BaseResourceDefinition uses the AttributeDefintion class from typesystem. > There are newer more funcitonal versions of this capability in the atlas-intg > project. This Jira is changing over the glossary implementation to the newer > entity / type classes. > Instread of the instanceProperties and collectionProperties in the > BaseResourceDefintions we should use something in this sort of style : > " > AtlasEntityDef deptTypeDef = > AtlasTypeUtil.createClassTypeDef(DEPARTMENT_TYPE, > "Department"+_description, ImmutableSet.<String>of(), > AtlasTypeUtil.createRequiredAttrDef("name", "string"), > new AtlasAttributeDef("employees", > String.format("array<%s>", "Person"), true, > AtlasAttributeDef.Cardinality.SINGLE, 0, 1, > false, false, > > Collections.<AtlasStructDef.AtlasConstraintDef>emptyList())); > AtlasEntityDef personTypeDef = > AtlasTypeUtil.createClassTypeDef("Person", "Person"+_description, > ImmutableSet.<String>of(), > AtlasTypeUtil.createRequiredAttrDef("name", "string"), > AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("address", "Address"), > AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("birthday", "date"), > AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("hasPets", "boolean"), > AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("numberOfCars", "byte"), > AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("houseNumber", "short"), > AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("carMileage", "int"), > AtlasTypeUtil.createOptionalAttrDef("age", "float"), > " > For the parent child relationships with glossary categories and terms we > should be able to have the type system manage edge deletion. As part of this, > we will need to investigate whether we could get rid of the disconnect and > connect methods added in ATLAS-1186 > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)