On 2016-07-19 17:47 (+0100), Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> it should - properties are a Map of Lists of Property values.
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Dylan Millikin <dylan.milli...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Quick question which is probably handled automatically but is this working
> > with multiple cardinalities on properties?
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:05 PM, gallardo.kev...@gmail.com <
> > gallardo.kev...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2016-07-15 16:25 (+0100), "gallardo.kev...@gmail.com"<
> > > gallardo.kev...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2016-07-09 16:48 (+0100), Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > With all the work on GLVs and the recent work on GraphSON 2.0, I
> > think
> > > it's
> > > > > important that we have a solid, efficient, programming language
> > > neutral,
> > > > > lossless serialization format. Right now that format is GraphSON and
> > it
> > > > > works for that purpose (ever more so with 2.0). Given some
> > discussion
> > > on
> > > > > the GraphSON 2.0 PR driven a bit by Robert Dale:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/351#issuecomment-231157389
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder if we shouldn't consider another IO format that has Gremlin
> > > > > Server/GLVs in mind. At this point I'm not suggesting anything
> > > specific -
> > > > > I'm just hanging the idea out for further discussion and brain
> > > storming.
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hey, so I'm trying to gather all infos we have here in order to prepare
> > > to move forward with the implem of GraphSON 2.0, here's what I come up
> > with
> > > :
> > > >
> > > > Things we have :
> > > > - Type format.
> > > > - The structure in Jackson to implement our own type format.
> > > > - All non native Graph types are typed (except the domain specific
> > > types).
> > > >
> > > > New things we need :
> > > > - Types for domain specific objects.
> > > > - Types for all numeric values.
> > > > - Don't serialize empty fields (outV and stuff).
> > > >
> > > > Things we consider changing :
> > > > - Type IDs convention. Before : Java simple class names. Now : starts
> > > with a "domain" like "gremlin" followed by the "type name", which is a
> > > lowercased type name (like "uuid", or "float", or "vertex"). Example :
> > > "gremlin:uuid".
> > > > - Type format ?
> > > >
> > > > Am I missing something ?
> > > >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > So I've made a few changes in the code from the original GraphSON 2.0,
> > > with the objectives described above, the code is still messy but I just
> > > thought I'd share some samples to start getting into the work and gather
> > > some feedback.
> > >
> > > In the example I've created a TinkerGraph with 2 vertices connected by an
> > > edge. The graph is serialized as a TinkerGraph.
> > > The samples are there :
> > > https://gist.github.com/newkek/97da94342bc32e571cf4a0ba1018df60
> > >
> > > Any feedback appreciated.
> > >
> >
>
I confirm, I didn't change anything in that section.
