Talk:Persistence Models versus Interoperability Models

--[User:Alexander Henket|Alexander Henket] 08:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC) This page confuses me. The 'ill understood concept' is rather more highlighted, than explained. For example: if a LIM shows me a 1..1 relation with Author: how am I supposed to know that there may still be other authors from a hierarchy that I cannot see in there? I can see how persistence models differ from communications models though. But I hope I interpreted it right when I read
If one were to query, at some later point in time, for Observations as
If one were to query, at some later point in time, for just Observations,
because otherwise it would feel undesirable to have authors move from one Act to another.

• Note the sentence "If one were to query, at some later point in time, for Observations, and Observation is the Focal class of the response model, .. effectively that means 'just observations' - although I agree that doesn't exclude the possibility that one could return the model shown on the left but just with another serialization. I'll make some edits to make it even clearer (as an example) that the response model will ONLY have observations Acts, and not acts of any other class.
  • This page is a draft, as such more discussion will follow, as will additional guidance as to how we should deal with this as implementers. Rene spronk 09:02, 13 January 2011 (UTC)