[Jsdsi-users] RE: Why?

[Sean R. <sra...@ae...>]

I see.=20

I guess your (tag (* set "send email")) should really be something mroe
like:

(tag email (* set write sign send))

Otherwise 'we' would need a way of getting application specific tags
'into' the jsdsi 'framework'.


Sean


On Mon, 2004-03-22 at 13:49, Luis Pedro wrote:
> Sean,
>=20
> I agree with you. The problem here was that i used the first version of
> jsdsi with something that we call complexTags. That complex tags have a=
tomic
> meaning, like:
> 	(tag (* set "send email")) means to do (tag (* write)), (tag (*
> sign)), (tag (* send))
> And this is in a xml file(properties file), when the parse is done the =
set
> tags and all others are treated like this:
> 	if(x instanceof SetTag)=20
> 		yyyyyy
> If i use (tag write) wich is a StringTag then the parse is made but in =
the
> wrong way. Maybe one day, right now i don't have too much patient to ch=
ange
> this one the application. I'll use the earlier SetTag or take the "if (=
e =3D=3D
> null || --> e.length < 2 <--)".
>=20
> But i'm the only one encharge of this...they are users and when that
> happened they were blocked the application went down :))))))
>=20
> Thanks for your explanation=20
>=20
>    -- Luis Pedro
> =20
>=20
> =BB   -----Original Message-----
> =BB   From: Sean Radford [mailto:sra...@ae...]=20
> =BB   Sent: segunda-feira, 22 de Mar=E7o de 2004 13:07
> =BB   To: Luis Pedro
> =BB   Cc: devel jsdsi
> =BB   Subject: Re: Why?
> =BB  =20
> =BB   Luis,
> =BB  =20
> =BB   (tag (* set foo))
> =BB  =20
> =BB   is exactly equivalent in meaning to:
> =BB  =20
> =BB   (tag foo)
> =BB  =20
> =BB   It was decided that allowing a SetTag to be empty or=20
> =BB   contain only one element was non-sensical and so should be=20
> =BB   disallowed - with any SetTag that would contain only 1=20
> =BB   element (resulting from intersection) to be 'converted' to=20
> =BB   the the element itself.
> =BB  =20
> =BB   Sorry if it has caused you problems.
> =BB  =20
> =BB   Do people want to re-visit this issue?
> =BB  =20
> =BB   Sean
> =BB  =20
> =BB   On Mon, 2004-03-22 at 12:50, Luis Pedro wrote:
> =BB   > Well,
> =BB   >=20
> =BB   > I remember, a little, of a discussion about the Tags.=20
> =BB   This my sound=20
> =BB   > stupid, but can any of u (Sean, Sameer) explain me why the SetT=
ag=20
> =BB   > needs at least 2 elements.
> =BB   >=20
> =BB   > I made an actualization of jsdsi on the application(here)=20
> =BB   and because=20
> =BB   > of that change it's all up side down :), i think i'm=20
> =BB   gonna revert the process!!
> =BB   > Some people here are beginning to cry :))))....they don't=20
> =BB   know about=20
> =BB   > the backup!! :)))
> =BB   >=20
> =BB   >    -- Luis Pedro
> =BB   --
> =BB   Dr. Sean Radford, MBBS, MSc
> =BB   sra...@ae...
> =BB   http://www.aegeus-technology.com
> =BB  =20
> =BB  =20
--=20
Dr. Sean Radford, MBBS, MSc
sra...@ae...
http://www.aegeus-technology.com