From a7019614896fdd3e29b9a28f6a8cfd2c1b365983 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Benjamin Paassen <bpaassen@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 20:47:25 +0100
Subject: Renamed domain to ontology.

---
 data/ontology/comments.osxml | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 data/ontology/comments.osxml

(limited to 'data/ontology/comments.osxml')

diff --git a/data/ontology/comments.osxml b/data/ontology/comments.osxml
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..621fe1c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/data/ontology/comments.osxml
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
+<ontology name="comments">
+	<import rel="ontology" src="book"/>
+
+	<!-- an annotation comment -->
+	<annotation name="comment">
+		<field name="replies" isSubtree="true">
+			<childRef ref="reply"/>
+		</field>
+		<field name="content">
+			<childRef ref="book.paragraph"/>
+		</field>
+	</annotation>
+
+	<!-- an point-like structure comment. -->
+	<struct name="comment">
+		<!-- Is there a chance to prevent users from having to redefine these
+		     two fields in comment and reply? Could we use a fieldRef here?
+		     Or would that be circular? -->
+		<field name="replies" isSubtree="true">
+			<childRef ref="reply"/>
+		</field>
+		<field name="content">
+			<childRef ref="book.paragraph"/>
+		</field>
+		<parentRef ref="book.paragraph">
+			<fieldRef ref="$default"/>
+		</parentRef>
+	</struct>
+	<!-- note that replies are organized in a tree fashion: One can also reply
+	     to a reply -->
+	<struct name="reply">
+		<field name="replies" isSubtree="true">
+			<childRef ref="reply"/>
+		</field>
+		<field name="content">
+			<childRef ref="book.paragraph"/>
+		</field>
+	</struct>
+</ontology>
-- 
cgit v1.2.3