Datamodeler - Naming Standards - technical white paper no longer available?

Hi,
I am wondering, is this document no longer available?
http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/database/datamodeler/pdf/DataModelerNamingStandards.pdf
I a m trying to learn how to apply Naming standards in data modeler but i cannot retrieve this document.
On the datamodeler homepage, on tab "Documentation"
clicking "Naming Standards (Technical White paper - pdf)"
keeps me redirecting into the tab "Overview"
regards,
E.
As I look at the content description of this document(i found that content description somewhere on the www), i believe i would find it very helpfull
Contents of this Oracle SQL Developer Data Modeler Naming Standardization reference guide
Introduction ............ 1
Overview . 2
Defining Templates for Keys, Indexes and Constraints....... 3
Applying the Templates to the Relational Model ............. 5
Prefix Management ........... 6
Setting Name Patterns for Elements..... 7
Defining Word Classification Types .. 8
Supporting Naming Patterns with SQL Developer Data Modeler ... 8
Reviewing Separator Settings for Elements in a Logical Model ..... 9
Reviewing Additional Settings for Elements in a Relational Model . 9
Using a Glossary .. 10
Defining Glossaries ......... 10
Using the Glossary Editor 10
Importing Glossaries........ 12
Importing a CA Erwin Data Modeler Naming Standard Glossary . 13
Using Abbreviations............. 13
Using the Name Abbreviations Utility............. 14
Name Translation . 16
Setting Model Level Name Restrictions ............. 18
Using Design Rules Validation Related to Naming Standards ......... 19
Conclusion ........... 20
Resources ............ 20

it's temporary problem and document will be available soon.
Meanwhile you can look at this thread Data Modeler: Naming
Philip

Similar Messages

AMS Standard Edition White Paper vs buying guide

From buying guide as http://www.adobe.com/hk_zh/products/adobe-media-server-family/buying-guide-comparison.html, the AMS Standard Edition is unlimited in RTMP and HTTP.
However, from the white paper as http://www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/ams/pdfs/ams5-intro-wp.pdf page 5, it did not mention any connection limit?
Will it assume also unlimited?

Yes. RTMP and HTTP are unlimited in Standard. Limits are on SIP and RTMFP

When inserting a .pdf of a document with a standard white paper color the test and images show up, but the white background is transparent. How do you also make the white paper color show up?

When inserting a .pdf of a document into a Keynote template with a standard white paper color the text and images show up, but the white background is transparent. How do you also make the white paper color show up?

Use the color fill option - select the inserted .pdf and assign a fill color of white to it using the Color Fill Menu on the Toolbar or the Color Picker Palette.
Good Luck.

DataModeler v3.3.0 - Naming standards template for surrogate keys creation

I'm using DM 3.3.0.734 and in the logical model we now can define in the entity properties to "Create Surrogate Key".
When we use Engineer to relational model, for each entity is automatically created a new column using the naming template {entity}_ID as NUMERIC (without precision) and is defined as primary key.
My questions are:
Is possible to define a different naming standard for surrogate key creation?. We define id_{entiry}
Is possible to set the precision of NUMERIC surrogate key?
If we define entity's column as Primary UID, these columns are included in an unique constraint, but are using the naming standards for PK.
As consequence are created the following:
Unique constraint name: entity_PK
Primary key(surrogate)name: entity_PKv1
There is any way to define naming standards like "{entity}_UID" for unique constraints, or even, "{entity}_SK" for surrogate primary key name?
Can anyone help with some of these topics?
Regards,
Ariel.

Hi Ariel,
Naming standards template for surrogate keys creation I logged enhancement request for that.
How to change those bad names (going to change them one by one is not an option):
1) If those "transformed" unique keys are the only ones you have in relational model then simply can apply naming standards
2) You can write transformation script to do that for you
3) you can use new functionality - search, export to excel file, change the names there (using find/replace will be faster) and return changed data back to relational model
you can find description for that here:
https://apex.oracle.com/pls/apex/f?p=44785:24:13179871410726::NO:24:P24_CONTENT_ID,P24_PREV_PAGE:6621,16
http://www.thatjeffsmith.com/archive/2012/11/sql-developer-data-modeler-v3-3-early-adopter-search/
http://www.thatjeffsmith.com/archive/2012/11/sql-developer-data-modeler-v3-3-early-adopter-collaborative-design-via-excel/
You should search for _PK, then filter result on Index and you can export result using report functionality (to XLS or XLSX output format). You can create template and include only table and name (of index) as properties to be included into report.
Regards,
Philip

Express White Paper

Thanks to all those who responded requesting the Express white paper. I
received an overwhelming response. I was expecting a dozen or so
requests - I received over 80. Apparently there is strong demand for
lessons learned about working with Express.
The paper is in-progress. Everyone that requested it will get it when
it is ready, hopefully before end of September. BTW, my paper on
Express and the Object/Relational Problem will be published by Dr.
Dobb's Journal about that time also - the publisher tells me that the
November issue will be on the newsstands by end of September. The DDJ
article is a review of the basics of Express, what it does, and how
you develop with it. It also includes our early experiences with it
(article was written end of April and reflects almost three month's
experience with Express at that time). The article also goes briefly
over our concept for a rapid process specific to Express. The white
paper will have much more to say on the topic.
Several people thanked me for my generosity in offering a free white
paper and sharing our experiences with the Forte' community. There is
nothing generous about the offer: it is unabashed self-promotion in the
finest tradition of American crass commercialism. We're a consulting
company. We sell our knowledge and experience. If, after you get the
white paper, you would like to retain us on a consulting assignment we
would be very grateful, and you will have a chance to pay us back for
our generosity. If not, maybe you can reciprocate and share your
experiences.
Now to the subject of this posting: why am I posting this now? Well,
for one thing, I received several responses that said something
like: " we've tried Express and we were disappointed with ...", or "we've
been using it and have been frustrated with ...", or "we've evaluated it
and we had difficulties with ...". I started writing reply notes to each
of the individuals who expressed those negative experiences, but when I
reviewed what I wrote, it sounded like a Dear Abby column, with the replies
sounding like: Dear Disappointed, or Dear Frustrated, or Dear With
Difficulties. I decided I'll just post one note for all those who've
had negative experiences, or who are just starting to use/evaluate Express
and are likely to have similar experiences. Hence this. I also felt that
I should give people somewhat of an overview of what's coming in the
white paper while they're waiting to get the finished product.
Perhaps initial difficulties with Express is a problem of unrealistic
expectations. I always try to remember Mick Jagger's words. Mick, as
everyone knows, is one of the great software minds of the 20th century:
"You can't always get what you want ...". You must determine if you're
getting what you need.
Seriously, I have been working on the object/relational "impedance
mismatch problem" for close to ten years now (since 1987 when I
developed an Ada/SQL binding for the US Department of Defense). I have seen
many solutions, and have developed several myself for C,C++,Ada and
for Oracle, Sybase, Informix, and Ingress. I find Express to be one
of the most elegant solutions to that thorny problem. If you look at it from
that point of view alone, it's very hard to fail to be impressed. If you're
expecting Express (or PowerBuilder 5, or any other solution) to be yet another
Silver bullet to slay the development monster then you'll be disappointed.
Software development is hard, will continue to be hard, and will continue
to get more complex. Anything that can help us eliminate or reduce what
Frederick Brooks calls "accidental complexity", and design around "essential
complexity", will help. Forte' and Express definitely do that. Paul
Butterworth's paper on "Managing the New Complexities of Application
Development", shows how Forte' has solved many of the development/deployment
problems. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it. If you have, I would
recommend a re-read if you've forgotten why you chose Forte' to begin with, or
if you yourself did not participate in making that choice, The Express user's
manual, "Using Forte' Express", shows how Express extends Forte' to reduce
the complexity of developing RDBMS-based systems.
To get an appreciation for what Express does for you, try a simple
experiment : spec out a GUI/RDBMS application, say the order entry application
that comes with Express as a tutorial. Do it without Express. Then do it with
Express. Try to make the application as complete as possible - it must
implement all your business rules and have all the behaviors that you desire.
Relax a bit about look and feel. Also Remember to keep the experiment fair.
As part of your application development come up with a framework and an
architecture that the next application will use. Your non-Express application
also must be as extensible and modifiable as Express allows an Express
project. Record the development time of both. If you can beat Express in
development time, then you're a Forte' development Guru and people should be
beating a path to your door.
Lest anyone think I am a cheerleader for Express, I want to mention that
I have some very strong disagreements with several aspects of the
Express architecture. One major problem I find with it is conceptual.
The Express relational encapsulation has added a great deal of accidental
complexity, i.e complexity that is not inherently there because
of the nature of the problem. It arises because of design or implementation
choices. Express represents each database table with three classes (there is
actually six classes per table, three of which are just derived place holders
to contain customizations, so we'll ignore them for this discussion). For a
table EMP, Express produces three base classes: an EMPClass, an EMPQuery
class, and EMPMgr class. The EMPClass is quite understandable. It
encapsulates the table's data. The EMPMgr class is somewhat understandable,
it encapsulates operations that manage the table's data as it crosses the
interfaces. But why do we need one class per table? A manager should manage
several things, not one thing. That leads us to EMPQuery, the encapsulation
that I have most difficulty with: creating a query class for each table. That
is definitely the wrong abstraction.
If you consider that, in general, a SQL query is multi-table:
select t1.col1, t2.col2, t3.col3, ...
from t1, t2, t3, ..
where <expressions on t1.col1, t2.col2, ...>
order by <expressions on t1.col1, t2.col2, ...>
you'll see that the abstraction here is a query tree across many tables,
many columns, and a large variety of expressions - single and multi-table. To
attempt to encapsulate that in objects that are basically single table objects
will produce a great deal of accidental complexity. The design choice of one
query class per table makes writing one-table queries simple, but writing
multi-table queries awkward.
The Express architecture would be much simpler if there is a QueryTree
class for all tables. Better yet, leave the representation of queries as
text strings - ANSI or Forte' SQL on the client side, and DBMS-specific on the
server side. A great deal of complexity in doing query customizations will
be reduced. You will lose some type checking that the current design has, but
hey, you can't always get what you want. When you have several hundred tables
in your database and Express generates six classes to per table, you'll see
that the number of classes generated as excessive. When you try to design a
general query modification scheme you'll realize how awkward multi-table joins
are to do via the Express BusinessQuery class. Last week I was developing a
general design for row-level security, the query structure drove me crazy,
I ended up catching the generated SQLText and inserting the security
constraints.
Now back to the Dear Abby column: If you're unhappy because of performance
issues, try to isolate the reason for the poor performance. This is not easy
in 3-tier applications. Don't be too quick to blame the bad performance on
Express. Do you have a non-Express benchmark application that does the
same thing and outperforms Express? Don't be too quick to blame Forte'
either. Do you have a non-Forte' benchmark, that does the same things
and outperforms Forte'? The operative words here are "does the same
things". A VB application that issues a SQL Select is not a benchmark.
Forte' allows you to instrument applications to study performance
bottlenecks. Find out where your hot spots are and try to do some design
work. If the Express architecture gets in the way, it's time for feedback
to Express developers.
Performance issues, particularly in 3-tier client/server systems are
multi-faceted and complex. There are many interactions of database
issues, interaction of the database with TOOL language issues, locking,
caching, timing of asynchronous events, shared objects, distributed objects,
remote references, memory allocation/deallocation, message traffic,
copying across partitions, etc. etc. that have to be considered. There
was an interesting discussion just a few days ago on multi-threading
on the client side, and blocking in DBMS APIs. Issues like that can
keep you bogged down for days. I have worked on several performance efforts
on triage tuning teams and swat re-design teams, where several hundred man
hours were dedicated to performance and tuning of c/s systems. Big and
complex topic. What I would advice about performance is what Tom Gilb says:
"(1) don't worry about it, and (2) don't worry about it yet" - assuming of
course that you have a rational design, and a sound framework. Many sins of
design are committed in the name of performance. Anyway, enough
of the harangue about premature considerations of performance. Bottom
line is : once you get your functionality, instrument, measure, and tune. If
your architecture was sound, you won't have to re-design for performance, you
would've designed it in.
On our project the system is so large we are subsumed with rapid process
issues: how can we get this monster finished on time? without having to
expand the team to several times its size, and without having to spend more
than we can afford? The upcoming white paper's focus will be on the rapid
process. Probably at a later date, we'll do another paper on performance
issues with Express.
Another reason you may be unhappy with Express is if you perceive that
it is the wrong tool for your application - but was chosen by
corporate mandate. If your application does not involve an RDBMS (say
real-time process control), then Express is obviously not for you. It may
also appear that Express is not suitable for your application if your usage
of the RDBMS is marginal, but your application logic is quite complex (in our
case the application has many AI aspects to it, a rules-based database, and
many interconnected patterns of rules, and rich behaviors). If you find
you're spending too much time doing things outside Express, fighting
Express, or doing way too many customizations, then Express may
not have been the right choice for your application.
Don't think, however, that Express is only for those applications that
maintain relational base tables. You can use a relational database to
store tables other than base tables (state transition tables, dialog
support tables, views, and other kinds of virtual tables). To make use
of Express's powerful application generating capabilities you can use
tables created for the sole purpose of of supporting an Express
application model. The table is in essence, a state transition
diagram. The Express application model creates rows in this
virtual table while the dialog is in-progress. You can use insert and
update triggers in your SQL engine to do the real thing to your base
tables. This trick is among some I'll detail in the white paper.
Another reason some people may be unhappy with Express may be methodology
tension between those who use behavior-driven methodologies (Booch, Jacobson,
Wirfs-Brock), and those who favor data-driven methodologies (OMT, Coad). If
you're in the first camp, you'll probably feel that the modeling done via
Express is not adequate. You'd probably say "that's not an object model!
that's an ERD". You would be half right - the Express business model shows
only containment and association relationships. It does not document "uses"
relationships, so it really can't be considered a full object-model. Granted;
but once you make that realization, your reaction should be one of joy, not
sadness. This is a brilliant reduction in the amount of modeling that needs
to be done since most MIS systems are dominated by their data-model, not their
behavior model (See Arthur Riel's Design Heuristics) . Behavior-based methodologies,
with their documentation of use-cases and class behavior will tend to be analysis
overkill for most MIS projects. For some OOA/OOD practitioners, going back to a
data-centered process may be unpalatable. For those folks my advice would be to try to
look at the business model/application models as meta-models. Take the
generated classes and produce a full object model if you wish. Document your
domain classes in your favorite CASE tool. By all means document
domain-pertinent behavior and use-cases, they will help you test. But do
appreciate the productivity gain produced by the reduction of modeling load
that Express data-centered approach gives you. Your detailed
behavior-based, use-case model may be a luxury you can't afford.
If the methodology clash manifests itself politically in your
organization, where you have the OO purists pooh-pooh a data centered
approach, then you have my sympathies. My best advice is to cool it on the
methodology religion front. If you have a product to deliver, you can't
afford it. Also keep in mind that even if your modeling work is reduced by
adopting a data-centered Express process, you'll still have ample
opportunities to fully utilize your OOD expertise when it comes time to add
functionality or improve performance of the entire application as a whole.
There will still be processes where Express may not be expressive enough. Those
processes whose behavior is so rich and intricate that you cannot find a
data-based trick to model them with, you'd have to do outside Express. These
should be rare and the exception not the rule in MIS systems, however.
Does that exhaust the list of reasons of why people may be
disappointed in Express? Probably not. Undoubtedly Express reduces your
degrees of freedom, and constrains your choices, but many times "jail
liberates". More reasons? I've heard some complaints about repository
corruption problems. I'm not aware that we've had those, or that it is
something due to Express. I'll check with our Forte' system manager. If we
have, they must not have been show stoppers, and our system manager must
have dealt with them quickly enough that the developers did not notice much.
Until you get the full paper in a few weeks, I'll leave you with some
thoughts about Express, and OO development in general:
1. Learn about the concept of "Good enough" in software
engineering. Here are some sources:
- Ed Yourdon: Read Ed Yourdon's article in the last issue of Byte,
titled "When Good Enough is Best". One of Yourdon's tips in the
article: "It's the Process, Stupid!"
Don't take "good enough" to mean that development with Express
requires you to lower your expectations, or lower your
standards. You must tune the concept of "good enough" to your
acceptable standards.
- Arthur Riel: Read Arthur Riel's great book "Object-Oriented Design
Heuristics". Riel shows that there are many problems with no optimal
solutions. This is particularly true in those systems that
are not purely object oriented. Systems that interface with
non-object oriented "legacy" systems, which is what Express
is. Also, Riel's discussion of behavior-based vs data-based
methodologies is very illuminating.
2. Don't obsess about look and feel. That's where Express is most
constraining. If you have unique look and feel requirements,
and look and feel is paramount to you, save yourself some pain and
choose another tool, or sing along with Mick: you can't always get
you want ...
3. Be clear about what rapid development really means. An excellent
resource is the book by Steve McConnell of Microsoft: "Rapid
Development - Taming Wild Software Schedules". A thick book, but the
chapters on best practices, and the tens of case studies are great. The
book shows clearly the differences between evolutionary
delivery, and staged delivery. It shows the differences between
evolutionary prototyping, throwaway prototyping, user-interface
prototyping, and demonstration prototyping and the appropriate uses
and risks of each. In our white paper we advocate a life cycle
approach that is basically evolutionary prototyping, with evolutionary
delivery, and occasional use of throwaway prototypes. We don't advocate
using Express for demonstration prototyping.
4. Realize that Express is maturing along with the product you're
developing. If you don't have deep philosophicalobjections to the
Express framework and architecture, then most of
the concerns with Express would be temporary details that will be
smoothed as Express, and Forte', mature. How long did we wait for
Windows to mature? Let's be fair to the Express developers.
5. The main keys to success in Express are not rocket science (I
worry now about having hyped up people's expectations myself). The
major keys to success revolve around management issues, not
technical issues: expectations management, process management,
and customizations management.
The full paper includes the design and implementation of a Customizations
Management System that allows you to plan customizations needed and to
inventory customizations completed. It automates the process of
extracting the customizations completed from the repository and stores
them in a relational database. A customizations browser then allows
management to plan and prioritize the implementation of customizations. It
allows developers to study the completed customizations and to reuse code,
design, or concepts to implement further customizations. Managing
customizations is absolutely essential for success in Express. The paper
will also detail a rapid process that is "Express friendly".
I'm glad there was such a big response to the white paper offer. Now I have
to sit down and write it!
Nabil Hijazi Optimum Solutions, Inc.
[email protected] 201 Elden Street
Phone: (703) 435-3530 #501
Fax: (703) 435-9212 Herndon, Va 22070
================================================
You can't always get what you want.
But if you try sometime, you might find,
you get what you need. Mick Jagger.
------------------------------------------------

[email protected] wrote:
>
A few comments on Nabil Hijazi's observations...
Nabil Hijazi writes...
One major problem I find with it is conceptual.The Express relational
encapsulation has added a great deal of accidental complexity, i.e complexity
that is not inherently there because of the nature of the problem. It arises
because of design or implementation choices.
Paul Krinsky comments...
Anyone who has used NeXT's Enterprise Object Framework (EOF) will be at home
with Express's architecture, it is very similar. NeXT has been around for a
while and have gone through a lot. They originally started with DBKit to solve
the persistence problem. Basically it wrappered the database libraries. EOF was
created when it became clear that the DBKit approach wouldn't work. EOF has
EO's (Enterprise Objects), EOQuery, EOController, etc. that do pretty much what
BusinessClass, BusinessQuery and BusinessMgr do. I'm not sure if Forte hired
people with NeXT experience, but it would be interesting to find out if both
companies came up with the same architecture independently. What are the
chances?
Nabil Hijazi writes...
The design choice of one query class per table makes writing one-table queries
simple, but writing multi-table queries awkward.
Paul Krinsky comments...
I don't think BusinessQuery is too bad once you get used to it. Multi-table
queries are pretty easy if you use the foreign attributes Express provides to
build connected queries. One feature I miss from EOF is the EOFault. An EOFault
stands in for an object to reduce the overhead of retrieving everything an
object has a pointer to. For example, a retrieve on customer that contains an
array of orders would bring in EOFaults to stand in for the orders. When one of
the orders was referenced, EOF would produce a fault (hence the name) and go
and get the required record. Of course you could force EOF to bring the real
data and not use EOfaults if you wanted (if chance were high that you would
need it). This feature saved a lot of memory and increased the speed of
retrieval while still providing transparent access from the viewpoint of the
developer. Another cool feature was uniquing. EOF kept track of the EOs it
retrieved for a client. So if two windows both retrieved Customer X, EOF would
realize this and point the 2nd window at the copy already in memory. This
avoided having multiple copies of the same object in memory and allowed
provided everyone with the most current changes.
Nabil Hijazi writes...
The Express architecture would be much simpler if there is a QueryTree
class for all tables. Better yet, leave the representation of queries as text
strings - ANSI or Forte' SQL on the client side, and DBMS-specific on the
server side. A great deal of complexity in doing query customizations will be
reduced. You will lose some type checking that the current design has, but hey,
you can't always get what you want. When you have several hundred tables in
your database and Express generates six classes to per table, you'll see that
the number of classes generated as excessive. When you try to design a general
query modification scheme you'll realize how awkward multi-table joins are to
do via the Express BusinessQuery class. Last week I was developing a general
design for row-level security, the query structure drove me crazy, I ended up
catching the generated SQLText and inserting the security constraints.
Paul Krinsky comments...
I like the fact that Express manages the mapping to the database. I can change
the underlying database schema and all my queries still work. When the DBAs
inform me that I'm not following their naming standard (remove all vowels
except for 207 "standard" abbreviations that somehow got blessed then compress
to 8 characters using a bit compression algorithm that NASA would be proud of -
am I ranting?) it lets me conform without having to deal with it except in the
business model. It's nice to have a layer of abstraction.
I'm not a big fan of having all the generated classes either. I think it's a
necessary evil because of TOOL. NeXT uses Objective-C which is much more
dynamic in nature (more in common with Smalltalk than C). Their business model
can be defined on the fly and changed at runtime. It's pretty powerful but you
always have the speed vs. size tradeoff. The BusinessQuery is a nice way to
send only the what you need to the server in a format that isn't too difficult
to translate to SQL but not so close to SQL that you couldn't rip out the
backend and use the same interface to communicate with something other than a
relational database.
With any tool you have to understand it's strengths and weaknesses. Express is
a 1.0 product. Given that I think they have done a great job. The biggest
request I have is that Express moves away from being so focused on UI and
Database access and focus more on the BusinessClasses. For example, why are the
Validate and NewObject methods not on the BusinessClass? I understand their
importance in the Window classes but they should really delegate most of the
work to the BusinessClass. Otherwise you end up with most of the logic in the
UI and a 2-tier application. One of the first things we did is extend the
Window classes to delegate validation, etc. to the classes they display.Paul,
This a very good point. After reviewing all the customizations we have done on
our Express project, (BTW, I work with Nabil) I found that we have not done any
business service customizations except for database row level security. We could
have easily moved validation to the business classes. Actually, Express gives you examples
for this. They recommend customizing the insert and update methods to apply validation.
You could simply add your own validate method on the business class and have the insert,
update, or the window call it. This is actually much more object oriented than coding
validation into the window classes (for the oo purest out there!).
Robert Crisafulli
AMISYS Managed Care Solutions Inc.
(301) 838-7540
>
I look forward to reading the white paper on Express. I would encourage anyone
else to post similar documents. If anyone is interested, I can dig up some
stuff I wrote on EOF's architecture. It's a good source for enhancement
requests if nothing else! If anyone has used other persistence frameworks I
think the group would benefit from their experiences.
Paul Krinsky
Price Waterhouse LLC
Management Consulting Group

Oracle SCM to CVS migration - white paper available?

Is there such white paper or technical notes available for a JDeveloper environment?
Specifically, what about moving version and configuration history to CVS?
Itsik

Sad to say, but there's no defined meta-data standard for the transposition of version information. So your only real answer is to grab the significant element versions out of Oracle SCM as files and start uploading them into CVS repository. Same as when you started using Oracle SCM.

Lightroom: Why does auto white balance no longer work after changing the camera calibration profile?

I'm using NEF raw files from Nikon.
Lets say for example I import a NEF file into Lightroom (v4) and click on 'auto' for white balance. The white balance in the image is adjusted correctly (somewhat). However, if I then change the camera profile (in the camera calibration section) from 'adobe standard' to 'camera standard' then the white balance in the image becomes very wrong. I then have to set the white balance back to 'as shot' and correct it manually instead.
Why would 'auto white balance' no longer work just because I change the profile from 'adobe standard' to 'camera standard'?
Any ideas?

Works as expected here...
Which Lr version and what OS??

SAP Business Objects and IBM i White Paper available

The "SAP Business Objects and IBM i" White Paper is available on IBM Techdocs under the follwing URL:
[http://www.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/WP101947]
The SAP Business Objects and IBM i white paper describes how the SAP Business Objects Enterprise XI server fits into an SAP on IBM i landscape. The paper provides detailed instructions showing how to integrate data sources located on an IBM i server with SAP Business Objects.
Feel free to post your feedback and comments.
Thanks and Regards,
Mirco
Edited by: Mirco Malessa on Jul 14, 2011 1:11 PM

Hi ,
Please find these blogs by Ingo. This should help you.
BusinessObjects and SAP - Installation and Configuration Part 1 of 4
Install Part #1
BusinessObjects and SAP - Installation and Configuration Part 2 of 4
Install Part #2
BusinessObjects and SAP - Installation and Configuration Part 3 of 4
Install Part #3
BusinessObjects and SAP - Installation and Configuration Part 4 of 4
Install Part #4
BusinessObjects and SAP - Configure SAP Authentication
SAP Authentication
BusinessObjects Integration with SAP NetWeaver BI - Technical Material
Thanks,
Gopi

Logical Model Naming Standard (Title Case) and Foward ENGINEERING how to???

Hi,
I just installed the datamodeler v3.3.0.747.
I want to use the Title Case style as separator style in my logic Model... To do this, i go to the Preferences Settings (Tools > Preferences > Naming Starndard > Logic Model) and set the Title Case as separator Style...
However, when i do foward engineering of the logical model... The Style is omitted and everything is like the logical model... For example,
If i create an entity called: ManagedAccount, i will expected that when i do fwd enginnering, the table associated to that entity will be call as Managed_Account; However, i still getting ManagedAccount...
So, What am i doing wrong??? or this is a bug???
Thanks!

Hi,
in order to get it working in current release you need to create glossary even empty one and set its property "Incomplete Modifiers" to true (check the check box with that name), and to to add that glossary in "Tools>Preferences>Data Modeler>Naming Standard".
We'll change it in next release to work without glossary for this particular case.
Philip

White Paper link problem

The link to the Intant Client white paper appears to broken. I get a login page and it wont accept my username and passord.

One small problem with Simulated devices:
You Cannot assign a new real device to the alias of a simulated device.
See Here- I probably should have reported this as a bug a long time ago
The workaround is obvious: Clear simulated devices from targets before installing applications that need that alias or running a system configuration API utility to assign a application specific alias
Jeff

C8180 won't align with white paper

Hi just bought a used C8180. The print test shows blank for light cyan and cyan and white stripes forj light magenta and magenta. I replaced all cartriges with new ones. I've run numerouse printhead cleaning and self test reports. Black print is fine.
Photos are horrible.
When trying to align the printer, it gives the error of "use clean white paper". The white paper is 96bright and new.
I've turned the unit off and on, reinserted the cartridges.
What else?
This question was solved.
View Solution.

Hi,
The printer uses a colored light to align the printhead. If the required color (in this case Cyan) is not printing - the printer cannot complete the alignment. If the printer does not know there is a problem, then it thing you are using a paper other than white.
It appears that the printhead of the printer is no longer functioning.
Russ@HP
Say thanks by clicking the Kudos Star in the post that helped you.
Please mark the post that solves your problem as Accepted Solution
(Although I am employed by HP, I am speaking for myself and not for HP)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Oracle Object Naming Standards/Conventions

I did a search on the Inet regarding recommended object (table, column, keys, ..., audit columns) naming conventions. I found different approaches, but I would like to know if there's a document with the naming conventions Oracle recommends/is using?
Thanks.

I have visited http://www.dba-oracle.com/standards_schema_object_names.htm
Oracle column naming Standards
Column Naming Standards
Column names should be spelled out whenever possible.
If a column name should exceed 30 characters, reduce the size of the column name in this order:
From the left of the column name, remove vowels from each word in the table name except for the first vowel of each word.
If the column name is still greater than 30 characters, use standardized shorthand indicators. Record this standard for consistent use.
I agree with the author that column names should be spelled out whenever possible. Some Oracle official database examples use abbreviations for column names but
I would prefer to user long Column Name that spells out the actual name.
For example, in Scott/tiger sample database, for EMP table, it is better to spell out the full name of column name so that UI design could be easier for the programmers.
EMPNO Employee_No
ENAME Employee_Name
JOB Job
MGR Manager_Employee_No
HIREDATE Hire_Date
SAL Salary
COMM Commision
DEPTNO Departmen_No
Since Forms Builder 10g and JDeveloper ADF can generate forms/applications using wizards, using a full column name will be better than an abbreviation, as the prompt for Item is automatically converted by Forms,
e.g. The prompt for Customer_Number becomes "Customer Number"
If you use abbreviation in column names, you need to change the prompts of generated forms manually.
Message was edited by:
wyfwong

SOA Component Naming Standards

Can anyone point me to any naming standard recommendations for Oracle SOA components (adapters, routing services etc)?
Regards,
Paul

Hi,
As of now there are no standards available for the naming convention. But, there is a general rule to name your components to maximize the consumability.
There is one guiding principle in the choice of names for services, operations, data types, and parameters:
maximize the consumability of the service. Business process developers should identify the services and operations that implement the business processes. Use meaningful names that favor business concepts over technical concepts.
Each service encapsulates a set of operations. The inputs of the operation are the data and the operation processes through the business function or transaction. Outputs are returned as a result of the business process or transaction.
Services should be named using nouns; operations should be named using verbs. Here is an example of
a simplified pseudocode, to demonstrate the concept.
Customer {
AddCustomer()
ChangeCustomer()
CorrectCustomerAddress()
In the above case, Customer is a service and Operations are AddCustomer, ChangeCustomer and CorrectCustomerAddress.

How to set naming standard that sets max number of words in column name?

Hi all,
Is it possible to set naming standard that sets max number of words in colum (or table) name?
I was looking video (1:08min)
http://download.oracle.com/otn_hosted_doc/sqldev/UserDefinedDesignRules/UserDefinedDesignRules.html
And here you can see how rule is triggered.
"...Name has 2 words; Max permitted - 1".
Thanks a lot

Hi,
you need to create glossary and set it in naming standards for your design.
This document is still valid - http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/developer-tools/datamodeler/datamodelernamingstandards-167685.pdf
Naming standard settings are located :
- DM 3.x - "Preferences>Data Modeler>Naming Standard"
- DM 4.0 - Design dialog>Settings>Naming Standard
If you want only check on number of words then glossary can be empty and you can set "Incomplete modifiers" option in that glossary.
Philip

Enforcing use of class word as naming standard via data modeler preferences

Using data model preferences, I have set both the "attribute" and "column" naming standards to have mandatory name parts of both "prime word" and "class word". I have also used data model preferences to specify a glossary that has several terms of type "class word" defined.
My assumption is that if I set a column naming standard preference to have class word as a mandatory name part, then I can apply the default design rules in my relational model and it will list an error "column with wrong naming standards" if any of my column names don't have a name part that is on the list of class words in the specified glossary. Is that assumption correct? If so, it doesn't seem to be working for me...
How does SDDM determine if a class word is missing? I.e., how can I enforce a naming standard that all attribute/column names must have a class word from our approved list of class words?
Thanks!

My assumption is that if I set a column naming standard preference to have class word as a mandatory name part, then I can apply the default design rules in my relational model and it will list an error "column with wrong naming standards" if any of my column names don't have a >name part that is on the list of class words in the specified glossary. Is that assumption correct? yes it's correct.
If so, it doesn't seem to be working for me...one of the settings cannot be changed - it's "Abbreviated only" in "Preferences>Data Modeler>Naming Standard". So only abbreviated part from glossary is taken into account - I logged bug for that.
You can change it - it's in dl_settings.xml file in your design's directory - find - abbreviated_only="true".
How does SDDM determine if a class word is missingIt needs glossary and separator setting.
You can read more here http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/developer-tools/datamodeler/datamodelernamingstandards-167685.pdf
Also can look at examples here Data Modeler: Naming
Philip

Datamodeler - Naming Standards - technical white paper no longer available?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for