<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: CDS Annotation structuring in Application Development and Automation Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/cds-annotation-structuring/m-p/12146385#M1976565</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Siddharth,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;There will be no performance issue on cds view, because these annotations are used only when u activate ur cds view and these will be saved to a DB table and while u generate the odata service, they will be used to create annotation service.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So surely writing them in different ways will not affect the performance.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But the first way is better as it is more readable especially in case if you have array of facet annotations.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Mahesh&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2020 12:00:58 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>maheshpalavalli</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-05-09T12:00:58Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>CDS Annotation structuring</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/cds-annotation-structuring/m-p/12146384#M1976564</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Experts,&lt;/P&gt;
  &lt;P&gt;Does arranging the same CDS Annotation in a hierarchy have an affect on the CDS in any way performance wise or otherwise?&lt;/P&gt;
  &lt;P&gt;e.g.&lt;/P&gt;
  &lt;P&gt;Way 1&lt;/P&gt;
  &lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;        @UI: {facet:[ { purpose: #STANDARD,
                       type: #IDENTIFICATION_REFERENCE,
                       label:'UI facet label',
                       position: 10} ],
              lineItem:[ { position: 10,
                           label: 'UI Lineitem Label' } ],
              selectionField: [ { position: 10 } ] } &lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;
  &lt;P&gt;way 2 &lt;/P&gt;
  &lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;        @UI.facet.purpose: #STANDARD
        @UI.facet.type: #IDENTIFICATION_REFERENCE
        @UI.facet.label:'UI facet label'
        @UI.facet.position: 10
        @UI.lineItem.position: 10
        @UI.lineItem.label: 'UI Lineitem Label'
        @UI.selectionField.position: 10&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;
  &lt;P&gt;Is it more of a aesthetic and code beauty point of view?&lt;/P&gt;
  &lt;P&gt;or does it have some performance related aspect.&lt;/P&gt;
  &lt;P&gt;I am new to this CDS.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2020 11:44:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/cds-annotation-structuring/m-p/12146384#M1976564</guid>
      <dc:creator>SidAnand</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-05-09T11:44:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CDS Annotation structuring</title>
      <link>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/cds-annotation-structuring/m-p/12146385#M1976565</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Siddharth,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;There will be no performance issue on cds view, because these annotations are used only when u activate ur cds view and these will be saved to a DB table and while u generate the odata service, they will be used to create annotation service.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So surely writing them in different ways will not affect the performance.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But the first way is better as it is more readable especially in case if you have array of facet annotations.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Mahesh&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2020 12:00:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.sap.com/t5/application-development-and-automation-discussions/cds-annotation-structuring/m-p/12146385#M1976565</guid>
      <dc:creator>maheshpalavalli</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-05-09T12:00:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

