I have an input xml and it has only one Telephone child element,
<ContactMethod>
<Telephone type="fax">
<Number>String</Number>
<Extension>String</Extension>
</Telephone>
</ContactMethod>
But my output XML has multiple Telephone child element,
<ContactMethod>
<Telephone type="fax">
<Number>String</Number>
<Extension>String</Extension>
</Telephone>
<Telephone type="fax">
<Number>String</Number>
<Extension>String</Extension>
</Telephone>
</ContactMethod>
I want to map from input element Number to output Number and also Extension element.
I can't change the schema because it is globally used.
I don't see any options to map using Element Mapping.
And I tried using adding Rule to the ContactMethod element, but no luck.
......
Above I is just example I asked. I need one to many mapping idea in datamapper.
See attached image, that is my actual requirement. Look at the Disclosure/CandidateDisclosure elements in source and destination
My source is XML and target is JSON, but the actual logic I need is similar for all the structures ..
I am maintaining a project which use DataMapper and faced the same issue. To solve it I add Java Transformer (you can use Groovy or other scripting languages) after DataMapper to group the one-to-many relationship.
Following is the pseudo code:
provide empty telpMap
foreach telpXml which is extracted from src/payload {
key = telpXml.get("#type");
if (telpMap.containsKey(key)) {
List number = telpMap.get(key).get("Number");
number.addAll(telpXml.get("Number"));
List extension = telpMap.get(key).get("Extension");
extension.addAll(telpXml.get("Extension"));
} else {
telpMap.put(key, telpXml);
}
}
return telpMap.values();
Related
Perhaps this is easy, but I am somehow not able to crack it yet. Message body for an exchange is basically a list of maps with both key & value being string. As example,
[{'key'='val1'}, {'key'='val2'},...]
I am using simple expression to set this as a property which I would be using in subsequent routes. This is how I am setting it:
.setProperty("myProperty", simple("${body}"))
But this sets the complete body. I just want to (somehow) set only the values part to avoid setting the entire list of maps. What I have tried and not working so far:
.setProperty("myProperty", simple("${body}['key']"))
.setProperty("myProperty", simple("${body}[*]['key']"))
.setProperty("myProperty", simple("${body}[0]['key']")) // this returns only the first value, I want all
Any idea/suggestion how can I achieve this ?
You can access every level of your body with Simple expressions:
${body} // get whole list of maps
${body[0]} // get first map in the list (index 0)
${body[0][key]} // get value of key "key" from the first map in the list
What you cannot do in a Simple expression is a conversion of your data structure in another one.
However, you can simply plug a Java bean into your route
from("direct:start")
...
.bean(MyConversionBean.class)
...;
And do the conversion with Java
public class MyConversionBean {
public List<String> convertBody() {
// extract all values (or whatever) with Java;
return listOfValues;
}
}
I am looking for a query (lucene, fts-alfresco or ...) to return all the document which have a specific child association (that is not null).
Some context:
Documents of type abc:document have a child-association abc:linkedDocument.
Not all document have an other document linked to them, some have none some have one or multiple.
I need a fast and easy way to get an overview of all the documents that do have at least one document linked to them.
Currently I have a webscript that does what I need, but prefer not to have tons of webscripts which are not business related.
code:
SearchParameters sp = new SearchParameters();
String query = "TYPE:\"abc:document\"";
StoreRef store = StoreRef.STORE_REF_WORKSPACE_SPACESSTORE;
sp.addStore(store);
sp.setLanguage(SearchService.LANGUAGE_FTS_ALFRESCO);
sp.setQuery(query);
ResultSet rs = services.getSearchService().query(sp);
List<NodeRef> nodeRefs = rs.getNodeRefs();
for (NodeRef ref : nodeRefs) {
List<ChildAssociationRef> refs = services.getNodeService().getChildAssocs(ref);
for(ChildAssociationRef chref : refs){
if(chref.getQName().equals(AbcModel.ASSOC_LINKED_DOC)){
logger.debug("Document with linked doc: {}", ref);
break;
}
}
}
Associations aren't query-able so you'll have to do what you are doing, which is essentially checking every node in a result set for the presence of a desired association.
The only improvement I can suggest is that you can ask for the child associations of a specific type which would prevent you from having to check the type of every child association, see How to get all Child associations with a specific Association Type Alfresco (Java)
I have created an ontology using protege. Now I want to write a code to traverse ontology using dotNetRDF. By mean of traverse is displaying all classes, sub-classes etc.
I am using following code but it is giving exception **
The Namespace URI for the given Prefix 'owl' is not known by the
in-scope NamespaceMapper
OntologyGraph g = new OntologyGraph();
FileLoader.Load(g, "humanontordf.owl");
OntologyClass classOfClasses = g.CreateOntologyClass(g.CreateUriNode("owl:Class"));
//This iterates over the things that are a class
foreach (OntologyResource r in classOfClasses.Instances)
{
//Do what you want with the class
Console.WriteLine(r.ToString());
}
This code is base on answer given here (http://answers.semanticweb.com/questions/19984/dotnetrdf-list-all-ontology-classes)
Can anyone let me know what am I missing in above code? any good URL for tutorial on dotNetRDF?
The error message refers to the following part of your code:
g.CreateUriNode("owl:Class")
This uses a prefixed name as a shortcut for the full URI which requires the owl prefix to be defined in your graph.
If you are getting this then your RDF file does not include this, you can define this like so:
g.NamespaceMap.AddNamespace("prefix", new Uri("http://some/namespace/"));
I guess an OntologyGraph should really define the OWL namespace automatically, I'll add this in the next release.
I have a document in RavenDB that looks looks like:
{
"ItemId": 1,
"Title": "Villa
}
With the following metadata:
Raven-Clr-Type: MyNamespace.Item, MyNamespace
Raven-Entity-Name: Doelkaarten
So I serialized with a type MyNamespace.Item, but gave it my own Raven-Entity-Name, so it get its own collection.
In my code I define an index:
public class DoelkaartenIndex : AbstractIndexCreationTask<Item>
{
public DoelkaartenIndex()
{
// MetadataFor(doc)["Raven-Entity-Name"].ToString() == "Doelkaarten"
Map = items => from item in items
where MetadataFor(item)["Raven-Entity-Name"].ToString() == "Doelkaarten"
select new {Id = item.ItemId, Name = item.Title};
}
}
In the Index it is translated in the "Maps" field to:
docs.Items
.Where(item => item["#metadata"]["Raven-Entity-Name"].ToString() == "Doelkaarten")
.Select(item => new {Id = item.ItemId, Name = item.Title})
A query on the index never gives results.
If the Maps field is manually changed to the code below it works...
from doc in docs
where doc["#metadata"]["Raven-Entity-Name"] == "Doelkaarten"
select new { Id = doc.ItemId, Name=doc.Title };
How is it possible to define in code the index that gives the required result?
RavenDB used: RavenHQ, Build #961
UPDATE:
What I'm doing is the following: I want to use SharePoint as a CMS, and use RavenDB as a ready-only replication of the SharePoint list data. I created a tool to sync from SharePoint lists to RavenDB. I have a generic type Item that I create from a SharePoint list item and that I serialize into RavenDB. So all my docs are of type Item. But they come from different lists with different properties, so I want to be able to differentiate. You propose to differentiate on an additional property, this would perfectly work. But then I will see all list items from all lists in one big Items collection... What would you think to be the best approach to this problem? Or just live with it? I want to use the indexes to create projections from all data in an Item to the actual data that I need.
You can't easily change the name of a collection this way. The server-side will use the Raven-Entity-Name metadata, but the client side will determine the collection name via the conventions registered with the document store. The default convention being to use the type name of the entity.
You can provide your own custom convention by assigning a new function to DocumentStore.Conventions.FindTypeTagName - but it would probably be cumbersome to do that for every entity. You could create a custom attribute to apply to your entities and then write the function to look for and understand that attribute.
Really the simplest way is just to call your entity Doelkaarten instead of Item.
Regarding why the change in indexing works - it's not because of the switch in linq syntax. It's because you said from doc in docs instead of from doc in docs.Items. You probably could have done from doc in docs.Doelkaartens instead of using the where clause. They are equivalent. See this page in the docs for further examples.
I've started switching over a project from hand-written JDBC ORM code to Ebeans. So far it's been great; Ebeans is light and easy to use.
However, I have run into a crippling issue: when retrieving a one-to-many list which should be empty there is actually one element in it. This element looks to be some kind of proxy object which has all null fields, so it breaks code which loops through the collection.
I've included abbreviated definitions here:
#Entity
class Store {
...
#OneToMany(mappedBy="store",cascade=CascadeType.ALL,fetch=FetchType.LAZY)
List<StoreAlbum> storeAlbums = new LinkedList<StoreAlbum>();
}
#Entity
class StoreAlbum {
...
#ManyToOne(optional=false,fetch=FetchType.EAGER)
#JoinColumn(name="store_id",nullable=false)
Store store;
}
The ... are where all the standard getters and setters are. The retrieval code looks like this:
Store s = server.find(Store.class)
.where()
.eq("store_id",4)
.findUnique();
Assert.assertEquals("Sprint",s.getStoreName());
Assert.assertEquals(0, s.getStoreAlbums().size());
The database is known to contain a 'store' row for "Sprint", and the 'store_album' table does not contain any rows for that store.
The JUnit test fails on the second assertion. It finds a list with 1 element in it, which is some kind of broken StoreAlbum object. The debugger shows the object as being of the type "com.lwm.catalogfeed.domain.StoreAlbum$$EntityBean$test#1a5e68a" with null values for all the fields which are declared as nullable=false (and optional=false).
Am I missing something here?
Thought I'd post an update on this... I ended up giving up on EBeans and instead switched the implementation over to use MyBatis. MyBatis is fantastic; the manual is easy to read and thorough. MyBatis does what you expect it to do. I got it up and running in no time.
EBeans didn't appear to detect that the join for the associated collection resulted in a bunch of null ids, but MyBatis handled this scenario cleanly.
I ran into the same issue and was able to solve it by adding an identity column to the secondary table (StoreAlbum). I did not investigate the cause but I suppose Ebean needs a primary key on the table in these kind of situations.