Forum Discussion

Juro_Mukai_ll_mit_edu's avatar
Juro_Mukai_ll_mit_edu
Ideator III
6 months ago

Really inconvenient misalignment between QD results and IOM standards

(from Aras blog post re: using QD from method....)

Parse the Result (of executing a QD from method):

When you get the response back from the server, you can parse the results into any format you need. The resulting XML looks a bit like your typical AML data structure. However, it has some important differences to consider:

  • The Item tag uses an "alias" attribute instead of "type".
    Why?  How can this be overridden to comply with the rest of the IOM?
  • The "alias" attribute may or may not match an ItemType name. You can explicitly set the alias in the Query Builder GUI.

  • The Item tag does not include the typical "id", "typeId", or "keyed_name" attributes.
    Why?  How can this be overridden to comply with the rest of the IOM?


  • Item properties contain the id of the referenced item.

  • Related items appear in the "Relationships" tag on the relationship item - not in the "related_item" tag.
    Why?  How can this be overridden to comply with the rest of the IOM?

1 Reply

  • Juro_Mukai_ll_mit_edu's avatar
    Juro_Mukai_ll_mit_edu
    Ideator III
    6 months ago

    I should also mention that QD does not allow referencing of Properties from other levels in the structure, only those in the current branch/leaf node.  So if a reference node is added further down the tree, there is no way to declaratively anchor the reference to the primary item at the top of the tree, etc.  Implementation via method logic for this is extremely complex and not practical in most business cases.