CellML Discussion List

Text archives Help


[cellml-discussion] Include_in_CellML_1.2 requested: [Tracker Item153] Allow multiple connections between the same pair of components


Chronological Thread 
  • From: david.nickerson at nus.edu.sg (David Nickerson)
  • Subject: [cellml-discussion] Include_in_CellML_1.2 requested: [Tracker Item153] Allow multiple connections between the same pair of components
  • Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:06:17 +0800

> ------- Additional Comments from Andrew Miller <ak.miller at auckland.ac.nz>
> Section 3.2.4 of CellML 1.1 states, in the second sentence of the second
> paragraph: "Only one connection may be created between any given pair of
> components in a model".
>
> This is a fairly pointless restriction from all fronts:
> * From a model authors perspective, it creates a burden on the author to
> consolidate all their connections which may have been created for different
> purposes, and current model authors claim that such consolidation is time
> consuming and error prone.

I'm not sure why this is the case. I much prefer to know that in any
given model there is only one connection between two particular
components and that is the *only* place I need to look to add, remove,
or correct variable connections. If you allow multiple connections
between the same components then it becomes much more difficult to
locate extraneous connections, or perhaps software would simply use the
first (or last) defined connection and leave an author bewildered when
there model edits have no effect due to a missed connection element earlier.

I'm really not sure who you mean by "current model authors"? But I
consider such consolidation to be much less time consuming when editing
complicated models and, as mentioned above, much less error prone.

> * From a model readability perspective, it is also burdensome because
> connections between variables may not be in a logical order (this is less
> of an
> issue if tools are used, but the point still holds).

I'm not sure the specification should be designed to make the XML
serialization look pretty - which is what you are saying here, right? If
you want this to hold then you would need to add rules such that
software is not allowed to change the order of the XML elements in a
serialized document.

> * Implementation experience suggests that it is no harder to allow
> multiple
> connections between the same pair of components when writing simulation
> software, but the extra constraint imposes more work on developers when
> writing
> tools which try to validate the model.

This seems to be a good reason to keep the rule as it is. Given there is
already a sever lack of CellML validation tools it seems a bad idea to
be making it more difficult for people to write such tools.


So, I guess what I'm saying is that I object to including this in CellML
1.2 - at the very least more discussion is needed to convince me this
should be done at all. So far I'm seeing one strong reason not to change
and no reason supporting the change...


Andre.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of page