[ome-users] Export-Import-Export-Import Observation

[Ilya Goldberg]

On May 29, 2005, at 2:26 PM, Joshua Moore wrote:

> or E-I-E-I-O for short.
>
> Let's assume Old McDonald had a database (e-i-e-i-o)
> And in this database there was an image (e-i-e-i-o)
>
>  (*sorry*)
>
> Ok. The image is exported from DB1 and imported into DB2. It gets 
> edited on
> DB2 and re-exported. What happens when the image gets re-imported into 
> DB1?
>
>   Or to put it differently:
>
> with "here an image, there an image, everywhere an image, image" does 
> Old
> McDonald still have a (coherent) DB?
>
>  ~ Josh
>
> PS Forgive the literary setup, it's what being a house-dad gets you. 
> But I'm
> serious. Is this a sensible and possibly already experienced 
> requirement?  A
> use-case that jumps out at me is a take-home (laptop) OME.

Yes, this has been a requirement for the XML design, and one of the 
reasons we use LSIDs.  All objects exported to XML get a bona fide 
LSID.  All imported objects that have a known LSID (i.e. duplicate) are 
silently ignored.  An OME instance stores the LSID for imported objects 
that it did not generate itself, so when they are re-exported, they get 
their original LSIDs.  The consequence is that everything should behave 
properly as you say.  This hasn't been tested in a while though...

> Does the DB "do
> the right thing" and handle the diffs, like some sort of whacked out 
> Image
> Content Management System? Because if so, that rocks!

Dude!

-Ilya


>
> -- 
> Weitersagen: GMX DSL-Flatrates mit Tempo-Garantie!
> Ab 4,99 Euro/Monat: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
> _______________________________________________
> ome-users mailing list
> ome-users at lists.openmicroscopy.org.uk
> http://lists.openmicroscopy.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/ome-users
>