Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

clarify comp / assoc w.r.t. deep ops #881

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

David-Kunz
Copy link
Contributor

What's still missing / not clear:

  • The target rows of a composition cannot exist without the parent (they're deleted automatically).
  • It's disallowed to have multiple compositions pointing to the same rows as they take ownership over them.

Please let me know what you think!

@@ -684,6 +684,7 @@ entity Orders.Items {

:::info Contained-in relationship
Essentially, Compositions are the same as _[associations](#associations)_, just with the additional information that this association represents a _contained-in_ relationship so the same syntax and rules apply in their base form.
Deep operations permit modifications to the composition's target entity, unlike associations.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How does this relate to the docs here: https://pages.github.tools.sap/cap/docs/guides/domain-modeling#compositions?
Seems like this kind of information is already mentioned there. Maybe we should rather link this other section here and extend the other section with additional information that we feel is missing?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@David-Kunz ping :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@beckermarc , true, there seems to be some kind of overlap, but that also applies to all other features. I think I would leave it as is for now.

@renejeglinsky
Copy link
Contributor

@David-Kunz @beckermarc @danjoa How to proceed here?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants