Good stuff, Dileepa.
Now the hard work begins :-)
Will be in touch off-list.
Cheers
Dan
On 22 April 2014 06:13, Dileepa Jayakody wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I'm pleased to inform you all that my gsoc proposal on ReputationBox has
> been accepted. I'm thankful to all of you, specially Dan, Oscar an
Well done Dileepa.
On Tuesday, 22 April 2014 5:14 PM, Dileepa Jayakody
wrote:
>Hi All,
>I'm pleased to inform you all that my gsoc proposal on ReputationBox has been
>accepted. I'm thankful to all of you, specially Dan, Oscar and David for >the
>continuous support and feedback given about
Hi Dileepa,
Congratulations for your achievement.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Dileepa Jayakody <
dileepajayak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I'm pleased to inform you all that my gsoc proposal on ReputationBox has
> been accepted. I'm thankful to all of you, specially Dan, Oscar and Da
Hi All,
I'm pleased to inform you all that my gsoc proposal on ReputationBox has
been accepted. I'm thankful to all of you, specially Dan, Oscar and David
for the continuous support and feedback given about my project idea. I hope
to do my best for my Gsoc project in Isis and hope you will continu
Hi all.David, we are REALLY pleased with the BDD support. To offer some stats, we currently have more than 4000 BDD steps in nearly 100 scenarios (and growing on a fast rate) fully managed with Isis, and it works REALLY well :-))Every new aspect on the domain is implemented 80% of time through the
Thanks guys.
I'm new to BDD scenarios, so I will go through the Isis documentation
pointed out by Oscar to get an idea about it.
Regards,
Dileepa
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:35 AM, David Tildesley wrote:
> Hi Oscar,
>
> Thanks - I want to have a go at using the BDD integration - good to know
> th
Hi Oscar,Thanks - I want to have a go at using the BDD integration - good to know that someone is using it and is pleased with it. If we were all in a room doing consensus based domain modelling together we probably wouldn't need to do sequence diagrams - we would already be familiar with the beha
Hi, David.Nice addition. A complementary approach (or currently the alternative to us) to sequence diagrams would be to define different features and scenarios on BDD [1].From those BDD scenarios Dileepa can directly implement them thanks to the excellent Isis BDD support (it has greatly changed o
I should add that I didn't show parameters and return types on the methods. The
best thing to do next is to validate your domain model by sequence diagram for
a key scenario (but following Demeters Law - "Only talk to your immediate
friends" so that the model remains loosely coupled).
Regards,
Hi Dileepa,
ContactedParty is useful when you have more than one user inbox for the same
user and you want to consolidate Contacts across multiple inboxes. If there is
always just one inbox (one account) or you don't need or want Contact
consolidation, then you don't need it and you shift the a
Hi David, Dan and All,
Thanks a lot for your help in shaping up the domain model. I think David's
model covers most aspects of the domain I plan to cover.
@David,
One entity I'm not clear about is "ContactedParty". What is the reason that
this is abstracted out from EmailContact?
Also I assume th
Hi Dan, Dileepa,
Yes - sorry should have read all the trails and also had a brain fade on the
uml violation thing as well.
Unfortunately this is proving really hard to do by email (as I suspected it
would be).
I've drawn a domain model based on what I think I understand and attached to
the J
Hi David,
I think you've raised one or two points I did already (eg "Entity" as a
name), which Dileepa already addressed in the latest iteration; the most
recent is [1]. But I really appreciate you taking the time to help develop
Dileepa's model here; great points being raised.
Hi Dileepa,
Not su
On 4 April 2014 20:55, Dileepa Jayakody wrote:
>
> >
> > Qn: Why is there a 1:1 relationship between Reputation and
> ReputationValue?
> >
> > ReputationValue entity encapsulates the result of the reputation analysis
> process.
> It can simply be a value type (a reputation score). And I think eac
Hi Dileepa,
Whenever I see a 1:1 relationship between two object/classes I am thinking that
they should be collapsed together unless there is some future reason you might
want to keep them separate. i.e. Reputation - Context.
ReputationObject, ComputationalAlgorithm appears to have no meaning
Hi All,
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Dan Haywood
wrote:
> I think I like Oscar's a bit more, also.
>
> Qn: Why is there a 1:1 relationship between Reputation and ReputationValue?
>
> ReputationValue entity encapsulates the result of the reputation analysis
process.
It can simply be a value t
I think I like Oscar's a bit more, also.
Qn: Why is there a 1:1 relationship between Reputation and ReputationValue?
On 4 April 2014 17:08, GESCONSULTOR - Óscar Bou wrote:
> Hi Dileepa.
>
> Not sure about this, but seems a little "strange" the "cycle" on your
> model between the Context, Cri
Hi Dileepa.Not sure about this, but seems a little "strange" the "cycle" on your model between the Context, Criteria and Reputation entities.Perhaps the Context is a more generic entity than Criteria, and it's the Criteria what should have a relationship with a Context, and also with Reputation?Som
Hi Oscar and all,
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 1:52 PM, GESCONSULTOR - Óscar Bou <
o@gesconsultor.com> wrote:
> Hi Deleepa,
>
> Seeing at your last diagram, shouldn't the Criteria be related with (is
> specific to) a Context? If so, a relationship would also be needed.
>
Yes, I agree. The criteria
Hi Deleepa,Seeing at your last diagram, shouldn't the Criteria be related with (is specific to) a Context? If so, a relationship would also be needed.Perhaps the Computation Algorithm could also be specific for one or more Contexts. In that case, a relationship is also needed.Also, perhaps the rela
Hi Dan and all,
I modified the diagram and the latest is : http://yuml.me/75c87f26
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Dileepa Jayakody wrote:
> Thanks Dan,
>
> I will modify the diagram with proper notations and reply with
> explanations..
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Dan Haywood > wr
Thanks Dan,
I will modify the diagram with proper notations and reply with
explanations..
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Dan Haywood
wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 08:09, Dileepa Jayakody wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > After doing some background reading on Reputation object modeling [1],
>
>
> (goo
On 2 April 2014 08:09, Dileepa Jayakody wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> After doing some background reading on Reputation object modeling [1],
(good to hear)
> I
> have extended my class diagram to describe the reputation analysis model in
> my application : http://yuml.me/c97453ec
>
>
There are some di
Hi All,
After doing some background reading on Reputation object modeling [1], I
have extended my class diagram to describe the reputation analysis model in
my application : http://yuml.me/c97453ec
An entity has a reputation which describes it's value. EmailContact, Email
are the 2 entity objects
Hi Dileepa,
Regardless of the implementation of the service, you should be able to
determine the service "contract" which would allow you to model the domain. At
the end of the day, the biggest influencer on domain shape is behaviour.
Regards,
David.
On Thursday, 27 March 2014 9:15 AM, Dil
Hi David,
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:13 AM, David Tildesley wrote:
> Now we are getting somewhere. Why do you want the domain to supply the
> keywords to the reputation analysis component? Do you allow the end user to
> define these keywords? If not then do they change all the time and you
> need
Now we are getting somewhere. Why do you want the domain to supply the keywords
to the reputation analysis component? Do you allow the end user to define these
keywords? If not then do they change all the time and you need an admin role
to be constantly updating them? If not then why not load t
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Dan Haywood
wrote:
> On 26 March 2014 10:33, David Tildesley wrote:
>
> > Hi Dileepa,
> >
> > I see. Then the domain will perhaps have some object representing
> > "ReputationScore" with a method such as "calculateEmailReputationScore"
> and
> > "calculateEmailCon
Hi David,
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:03 PM, David Tildesley wrote:
> Hi Dileepa,
>
> I see. Then the domain will perhaps have some object representing
> "ReputationScore" with a method such as "calculateEmailReputationScore" and
> "calculateEmailContactReputationScore" with the implementation of t
On 26 March 2014 10:33, David Tildesley wrote:
> Hi Dileepa,
>
> I see. Then the domain will perhaps have some object representing
> "ReputationScore" with a method such as "calculateEmailReputationScore" and
> "calculateEmailContactReputationScore" with the implementation of the
> methods based
Hi Dileepa,
I see. Then the domain will perhaps have some object representing
"ReputationScore" with a method such as "calculateEmailReputationScore" and
"calculateEmailContactReputationScore" with the implementation of the methods
based on Mahout and injected via a domain service. So it's the
Hi David,
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 3:22 PM, David Tildesley wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> On Wednesday, 26 March 2014 8:49 PM, Dileepa Jayakody <
> dileepajayak...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Dan, David and all,
>
> > Above class diagram only contains the domain entities. Perhaps David's
> > question on
On Wednesday, 26 March 2014 8:49 PM, Dileepa Jayakody
wrote:
> Hi Dan, David and all,
> Above class diagram only contains the domain entities. Perhaps David's
> question on the domain requirements could be clarified if domain service
> classes are also included in the diagram. Shall I do
On 26 March 2014 09:18, Dileepa Jayakody wrote:
>
>
>> My question was, for ay given Email instance, is the Reputation that it
>> is associated with the same as the Reputation associated with the
>> EmailContact that sent it?
>>
>
> No, it's 2 different instances. Email has a email reputation ins
Hi Dan and all,
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Dan Haywood
wrote:
>
> On 26 March 2014 07:48, Dileepa Jayakody wrote:
>
>>
>> @Dan,
>> EmailContact's reputation is an aggregated and normalized reputation
>> score calculated based on the overall reputation scores of the emails
>> exchanged with
On 26 March 2014 07:48, Dileepa Jayakody wrote:
>
> @Dan,
> EmailContact's reputation is an aggregated and normalized reputation score
> calculated based on the overall reputation scores of the emails exchanged
> with that person.
>
Yes, understood.
My question was, for ay given Email instance,
Hi Dan, David and all,
Above class diagram only contains the domain entities. Perhaps David's
question on the domain requirements could be clarified if domain service
classes are also included in the diagram. Shall I do so?
@David
reputation scoring is not done by some other system, it's done in
Hi Dileepa,
It's hard to make any comments without understanding the domain requirements.
If some other system is doing the scoring of reputation and you are just
holding the result then maybe the model is ok.
Need to see key attributes and methods.
David.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Hi Oscar,
Thanks for your suggestions. Yes there should be a 1..n relationship
between EmailContact > Email (I have missed that in my diagram). I agree
with you that EmailContact-Reputation relationship can be derived from the
Email's sender attribute over the emails the contact has sent.
I was a
Mmmm... seems not properly pasted it.
Try this one:
http://yuml.me/7801f5db
Or, if also considering the EmailContact relationship with UserInbox a derived
one (the same EmailContact could have Emails on different UserInbox'es):
http://yuml.me/2359d93b
Just to question the model :-)
Regards,
Hi, Dileepa.Just some questions for helping in validating the model.Why not a variation like this?http://yuml.me/edit/825d7db5Still not clear to me why the Reputation entity has a relationship with EmailContact also, and not only to an Email. The EmailContact relationship could always be derived fr
Hi Dan and all,
Here is the basic class diagram for the domain entitiies in RB :
http://yuml.me/825d7db5
Please note that I have used the name EmailContact instead of
EmailSenderProfile for clarity purpose. Effectively this entity represents
the email contacts in the user's inbox.
Each email and
Hi Dan,
Thanks a lot for your insight. Please see my comments inline below.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Dan Haywood
wrote:
> Hi Dileepa,
>
> I've just posted the comments below on your GSOC proposal. I know that
> you can't make further changes to the proposal, so I'm posting them here on
Hi Dileepa,
I've just posted the comments below on your GSOC proposal. I know that you
can't make further changes to the proposal, so I'm posting them here on the
dev list, so we can keep the conversation going.
So..
* good to see you intend to set up a project on github for this; please do
thi
44 matches
Mail list logo
