Skip to content

GitLab

  • Projects
  • Groups
  • Snippets
  • Help
    • Loading...
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Sign in
S SDT
  • Project overview
    • Project overview
    • Details
    • Activity
    • Releases
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
  • Issues 16
    • Issues 16
    • List
    • Boards
    • Labels
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge requests 0
    • Merge requests 0
  • CI/CD
    • CI/CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
  • Operations
    • Operations
    • Incidents
    • Environments
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • CI/CD
    • Repository
    • Value Stream
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Members
    • Members
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • MAS
  • SDT
  • Issues
  • #7

Closed
Open
Created Jun 05, 2018 by Yongjing Zhang@yongjingMaintainer

'id' vs 'name' vs ' type'

In current SDT model, '@id:ID', '@id:Name' and '@name:Text' are all used as sort of identifiers for 'Device', 'ModuleClass', 'Module', 'Property', 'Action', 'DataPoint', 'Event' etc.

In my understanding, all of them are supposed to be unique (in its given context, e.g. two ModuleClasses in the same Domain shouldn't use the same 'name'). And many of them are more like a 'type' definition (in JSON schema).

Shouldn't we align the terms into just one (id, name, or type)?

I understand the datatypes of those attributes are defined differently (xs:ID, xs:Name for @id, while undefined for '@name'?), but is that necessary? Even though the types are different, the terms could be aligned I guess.

Assignee
Assign to
None
Milestone
None
Assign milestone
Time tracking