Grouper Developers Forum

[Tom Barton <>]

I agree that your proposal is more concise syntax. In fact, maybe even 
leave the <query-list> element out of it.

Does anyone have any reasons why this syntax should not be trimmed up in 
the next release of ldappc?

Tom

Kathryn Huxtable wrote:
> Oh my, that formatted badly. Try this. -K
>
>
> On 2/17/07 10:58 AM, "Kathryn Huxtable" 
> <>
>  wrote:
>
>     BTW, I don't really like the selection XML syntax. Instead of having
>     a separate section with a list with options for each type of
>     selection, why not mix them, e.g. Instead of
>
>         <group-queries>
>           <subordinate-stem-queries>
>             <stem-list>
>               <stem>testStem</stem>
>               <stem>qsuob</stem>
>             </stem-list>
>           </subordinate-stem-queries>
>           <attribute-matching-queries>
>             <attribute-list>
>               <attribute name="attribute" value="value" />
>             </attribute-list>
>           </attribute-matching-queries>
>         </group-queries>
>     Why not have:
>
>         <group-queries>
>           <query-list>
>               <subordinate-stem stem=”testStem” />
>               <attribute-match name="attribute" value="value" />
>           </query-list>
>         </group-queries>
>     I think this would be more concise and also more readable. I would
>     also suggest doing away with the <query-list> element and making the
>     <group-queries> element take one or more of the different query type
>     elements.
>
>     BTW, using Blair’s GroupTypeFilter I have produced a group type
>     query selector for ldappc. This is done.
>
>     -K
>
>     On 2/12/07 8:12 AM, "blair christensen." 
> <>
>  wrote:
>
>     >  On 2/10/07, Tom Barton 
> <>
>  wrote:
>     > > Good suggestion. Ldappc uses GrouperQuery to select groups &
>     > > memberships, and reviewing that just now, I see that there's no group
>     > > type filter. If we create a group type filter, would you be game to
>     > > extend Ldappc's current use of GrouperQuery to include this new
>     filter?
>     >
>     >  I added a group type query filter to HEAD in early January so there
>     >  will be API support for this in the next Grouper release.