Re: [Gzz] org/fenfire/util/RDFList.java

[Benja Fallenstein]

Tuomas Lukka wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 01:58:01PM +0200, Benja Fallenstein wrote:
> > You're thinking of bags. Read the documentation above.
>
> Well, the versioning of lists is very intricate, and also depends
> very much on the internal representation.
>
> For linked lists, two sets of incompatible changes can get you
> a loop, if not dealt with properly (see the gzz/Documentation/VersioningMerge).

Ok, true, for merge it's a problem.

Last time you raised this, you were talking about--

> For the RDF _1, _2, ... types of lists, it's worse: an insertion
> maps to O(n) tuple changes.

which is bags, not "collections" (lists); this is about diff/patch, and 
I assumed again you were talking about problems when doing diff/patch, 
not merge.

In CVS, we can probably represent lists through the special RDF syntax:

    <hasAuthors rdf:parseType="Collection">
        <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://ex.org/foo"/>
        <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://ex.org/bar"/>
    </hasAuthors>

(This is a list with two elements.) CVS will then handle merge just fine.

When doing a triple-wise diff, the merge will indeed have to handle 
lists specially. I think the partial order stuff would probably be fine.

[other mail]
> Let's talk first about *for what* is it going to be used.
>
> Different types of lists need different versioning constraints.

Ok, how so? (Which types of lists need different merge handling?)

- Benja