Re: [SMW-devel] [Semediawiki-user] RFC Subobjects (aka internal objects) in SMW
Hi Markus, While testing #subobjects on MW 1.18 (on SMW 1.7alpha), we started to convert our SIO objects into SMW-subobjects (we hope that with this we can avoid double entries that now and then appear due to problems in SIO ). One advantage of SIO is that its assigns individual object-ids (#1... etc.) but for #subobjects we have to state explicitly the object id, considering only one or two objects then this procedure just works fine. For a larger set of objects per page (some of our pages contain a data set of 100-200 numerical statistics) we would wish #subobject would identify that no object identifier is present and than it would automatically assign a number (such as #1 ) so any object can be identified individually. Cheers, MWJames On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Markus Krötzsch mar...@semantic-mediawiki.org wrote: Following up the discussions we had at SMWCon in Berlin, we have now implemented a new feature for internal objects in SMW. This email explains this feature and starts the discussion on some open questions for it to become stable. == Goal == Allow SMW annotations to refer to objects that have their own property-value pairs just like wiki pages, but that do not actually have an article in the wiki. This can be used to group property-value pairs given on one page without requiring new auxiliary pages to be created. It also integrates the main functionality of the Semantic Internal Objects (SIO) extension into SMW. ... -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d ___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] RFC: Value distribution support in result formats
Hey, modify the query results to contain only the labels and the numbers This was actually the first approach I considered and implemented to some extend. However, the query result object is really not made to be used like this, and the ways to get around of this where just to much of a hack, which is why I decided to go with the current approach. Having some more generic mechanism that does not require QPs to care about what post processing is happening at all would be nice, but would require rewriting the query result class or going with some messed up architecture. Either way, it's a bunch of work, which although I agree would be useful, is not something I'm going to take on now. If you or someone else wants to have a go at it, please do, I'll be happy to help review it if needed. What I implemented should be seen as a way for query printers to support value distribution behaviour without all of them reinventing the wheel, not a generic post processing system. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw http://www.bn2vs.com Don't panic. Don't be evil. -- -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] one-to-many validation
Hi Vladimir, Sorry about the delay - we've had the Thanksgiving break here, which has restricted my internet time significantly. This patch sounds very interesting, and I plan to look at it at some point soon, unless someone else does first. -Yaron On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Vladimir Kostyukov vladimir.kostu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All! I've resent my mail about validation patch, because I haven't got any feedback. I've just successfully implemented correct validation feature in Semantic Forms (see attached). Actually, when I've started use SMW I was surprised that it is not support any validation mechanism (I mean one-to-many case). Now, we can use existing values only property for text with autocomplete input and with combobox elements. But I've changed behavior of validation mechanism. Now incorrect fields are not clearing when user input incorrect data. It is checking on submitting phase. Also my patch fixed bug with fields which edited last. For instance: we can enable existing values only for combobox in current implementation and it will not work for fields, in which we enter incorrect data and than click submit (without changing focus) (see change event of jQuery). In current patch version there is not special message for non existing value. I am using blank field message. I use my patch in our corporate project and it works fine. What do think about it? -- Thanks, Vladimir Kostyukov -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d ___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel -- WikiWorks · MediaWiki Consulting · http://wikiworks.com -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
