#2602 Association Qualifier

Function
closed-rejected
jsr48-client
5
2014-01-31
2013-01-29
Anton
No

Classes declared with aggregation and composition qualifiers are not detected as associations bei the jsr48 client.
Means the CIMClass object doesn't have the appropriate CIMQualifer and isAssociation() returns false.
e.g.
[Association, Aggregation, Composition]
class AssociationClass {
...
};
Classes with just the association qualifier are detected correctly.

Discussion

  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2013-01-29
    • assigned_to: nobody --> blaschke-oss
     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2013-01-29

    Can you please provide more details relating to the failure? i.e. what qualifiers are present when CIMClass.isAssociation() returns false?

    Looking at DSP0004, it seems that the Association meta-qualifier is supposed to be present if the Aggregation/Composition qualifiers are also present. In section 5.6.3 from version 2.7.0:

    "For qualifiers such as Association (see 5.6.2), there is an implied usage rule that the meta qualifier must also be present. For example, the implicit usage rule for the Aggregation qualifier (see 5.6.3.3) is that the Association qualifier must also be present."

    The CIMClass constructor bases isAssociation() on the presence of the "Association" qualifier with value true and not the state of the pIsAssociation parameter, if present.

     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2013-02-20
    • component: --> jsr48-client
     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2013-02-20

    Classic ID #3602485

     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2013-02-20
    • status: open --> open-needinfo
     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2013-02-20

    Please see the comment above (https://sourceforge.net/p/sblim/bugs/2602/#252b), more information is needed to address this issue. A CIM-XML response, Java code, etc will suffice.

    The Java CIM Client can possibly provide a solution/workaround, but more information is needed.

     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2013-07-24

    Over three months have passed since the last request for additional info

     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2014-01-31
    • status: open-needinfo --> closed-works-for-me
     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2014-01-31

    This ticket was opened a year ago and we are still awaiting the requested additional info in order to be able to address it. As mentioned in that comment, the CIM Infrastructure Specification (DSP0004) requires that the Association qualifier be present if the Aggregation and/or Composition qualifiers are present. Capturing the CIM-XML response should clarify this - if the Association qualifier is present, it is a Java CIM Client issue, if not, it is a CIMOM issue.

    Closing this ticket for now, please feel free to reopen if the additional info proves the Java CIM Client is at fault.

     
  • Dave Blaschke

    Dave Blaschke - 2014-01-31
    • status: closed-works-for-me --> closed-rejected
     

Log in to post a comment.