[
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)
