Too bad, I saw this function:
@Override
public ModelContent getContent(ModelId modelId, ModelId mappingModelId) {
String url = String.format("%s/%s/%s/content/mappings/%s", getRequestContext().getBaseUrl(),
String.format(REST_MODEL_BASE), modelId.getPrettyFormat(),
mappingModelId.getPrettyFormat());
return requestAndTransform(url, transformToClass(ModelContent.class));
}
and was hopefull. I noticed that the mappingReference is also null allthough a mapping is assigned to the model. Is this correct?
I have created a model which uses the multiple
keyword to add an array of objects. In my case, it is an array of statuses mandatory multiple Statuses as Status
. The status functionblock looks as follows:
functionblock Status {
status {
mandatory Type as StatusType
mandatory Level as StatusLevel
}
}
I'm trying to get this functionblock filled (in Ditto) using the java client. Is this possible using the client and if so, do you have an example of that?
Hi @aedelmann , I have a bit of a tough one for you. Unfortunately given it involves quite a lot of black box/proprietary stuff, I don't think it's suitable for SO.
TL;DR
Details
As I'm not quite sure what happens behind the scenes there, I'm not sure how to address this, and which team(s) would ultimately be responsible to provide a solution (assuming a solution is desirable, which I think it is).
Workaround
"solution-owner": {
"subjects": {
"bosch:[my technical user id]@ciamids_[some UUID]": {
"type": "bosch-id"
}
},
"resources": {
"thing:/": {
"grant": [
"READ"
],
"revoke": []
}
}
},
I'm still encountering the 'multiple is ignored' but and also left a comment on the already closed issue. Should I open a new issue instead or will someone reopen it @thjaeckle ?
As stated in the issue I tested this with vorto 0.12.4 and the ditto json schema generator as well as my own generator.
I observed in my ditto skeleton generator if I have a infomodel -> functionblock.status.property -> datatype that the property of type object will have it's fields duplicated. If the datatype e.g. says
mandatory name as string
optional description as string
the resulting json will be
datatype: {
name: "",
description: "",
name: "",
description: ""
}
Do you think it's more lickly that this is a bug in the generator API or that it's a problem with my template?