Re: [SMW-devel] RFC Subobjects (aka "internal objects") in SMW

[Markus K. <ma...@se...>]

On 30/10/11 21:43, Stephan Gambke wrote:
> Hi Markus,
>
> Am 30.10.2011 12:12, schrieb Markus Krötzsch:
>> Thanks. What I now implemented requires naming for all subobjects, so it
>> is not optional. One could have another parser function that does not
>> require a name; overloading #subobject to do both (named subobjects
>> without any return value and anonymous subobjects returning their
>> generated name) seems to have a great potential for confusion. Maybe we
>> don't need unnamed subobjects after all.
>
> I think unnamed subobjects would be very useful. E.g. suppose you have a
> multiple-instance template in a Semantic Form. Currently there is no way
> to ensure unique names for the subobjects.
> (Ok, you could use the extensions Variables and Parser Functions).

Fair point. I could provide another parser function for this (behaviour: 
it gets only a list of property=value pairs and returns the name of the 
generated subobject).

So we need a second new name :-o. But I think overloading #subobject is 
possibly confusing ("if the first parameter does not contain a '=' then 
make a subobject name and return it; otherwise use the first parameter 
as a name and do not return anything").

Regards,

Markus