RE: [higgins-dev] Revised Higgins data model goals

["Jim Sermersheim" <jimse@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> "Mary Ruddy" <mary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 4/18/06 5:47 PM >>>
>A context can have a subcontext (1:1) or multiple subcontexts (1:M)
>
>For example, there might be a context associated with a particular
>system, and a person may be participating with that system in
multiple
>subgroups:  a My Base Ball Fan Yahoo group and My Neighborhood
>Association Yahoo group. 

Ok, my previous understanding of this was that a single Context would
be presented. The context provider for the "Uber"-Context could be
configured to virtualize the Uber-Context from the two sub contexts.
Thus, to the consuming application, it looks like a single Context. In
the Bandit project, we call this uber-context provider a joined context
(well, joined realm in our terms). I guess this is a different use
case.

In the view where there are two related Contexts like the example
above, is the person (or application) interfacing with Higgins presented
with one or the other Context and then actively discovers the related
Context(s)? Just trying to visualize the experience/use case. Trying to
find the scenario where one will access the set of related context
information on a Context.

>Or a context created for participation at a conference may be
structured
>with subcontexts: one of which corresponds to the person's role as an
>attendee, one their role as a presenter, and one designed for any
>visitor to the conference city.

Is there a goal to have the notion of Context hierarchy in Higgins? Or
is the space of Context's flat? If a hierarchy can be modeled, how is
the parent/child relationship indicated (on the context relationship
element I imagine). Are there use-cases that require a hierarchical
relationship? Is there a max depth to a hierarchy?

<snip>

Thanks,

Jim