Map classification with value list

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Unable to add a value list map for the hasClass role of the
ClassificationOfIndividual template.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by dariuska...@gmail.com on 14 Apr 2010 at 12:30

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by dariuska...@gmail.com on 3 May 2010 at 10:58

• Added labels: Priority-High
• Removed labels: Priority-Medium

[GoogleCodeExporter]

This happens because the software considers ClassificationOfIndividual template 
to be
a "relationship template" because it has no value-type roles (i.e. xsd:string,
xsd:float, etc.).

Will try manually editing map to add ClassificationOfIndividual as a property
template and see if exchange works. If not this may be more fundamental and the 
issue
of property and relationship templates will need to be addressed as part of the 
map
upgrade work.

Original comment by dariuska...@gmail.com on 4 May 2010 at 10:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by rdecarlo73 on 12 May 2010 at 6:20

• Changed state: Accepted
• Added labels: Backlog-Sprint-1

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Did you try it?

Original comment by rdecarlo73 on 13 May 2010 at 1:33

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I added the template with the mapping editor, saved, edited the map and changed
“Relationship” to “Property”, then went back to the mapping editor and 
all was fine.
There were no errors in DTO generation or loading the façade. I looked in the 
triples
and found the classes I put in the value map, so all that is probably fine. I 
have
not tested a pull yet. 

Original comment by dariuska...@gmail.com on 17 May 2010 at 9:54

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Could you provide me with more information regarding which role types should be 
allowed to have value lists mapped to regardless of the template types? eg. 
roles 
with/without reference class etc.

Original comment by Strydom5607@gmail.com on 18 May 2010 at 9:44

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I think we should err on the side of allowing it.
We could not allow it if the role is "value" type like xsd:string, double, etc. 
We
can also not allow it if the role type is a fixed value (hasValue) rather than a
range restriction.
Other than that, the user should just not use a value map if he doesn't want 
one!

What do you think?

Original comment by dariuska...@gmail.com on 18 May 2010 at 10:47

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hmmm, Yes I think it would be ok if we leave upto the users to decide unless we 
can 
identify potential issues with it.

Original comment by Strydom5607@gmail.com on 18 May 2010 at 11:00

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Added additional combobox item to allow reversal of valuelist edits
Valuelist edits now allowed for all template types

Original comment by Strydom5607@gmail.com on 20 May 2010 at 12:00

• Changed state: Fixed