RE: [provision] First cut at the SPML schema to use for the interop

["Darran Rolls" <Darran.Rolls@waveset.com>]

Cross-over...

How about the following list for the "titles" then:

BasicClerk
ReceivableClerk
CustomerRelations
PersonalAssistant
Electrician
Mechanic
WarehouseHand
ProductionManager

We should all be able to deduce/apply some rule to these to govern some
provisioning action (even if it's the same action and the attribute
simply gets stored as a PST-D attribute...

=========================================================
Darran Rolls                      http://www.waveset.com
Waveset Technologies Inc          drolls@waveset.com 
(512) 657 8360                     
=========================================================


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Madsen [mailto:p.madsen@entrust.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 2:30 PM
> To: 'Jeff Bohren'; provision@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [provision] First cut at the SPML schema to use for the
> interop
> 
> Hi Jeff, 'Title' works, it does imply us agreeing on the list of
allowed
> values that make some sort of sense in the scenario context, e.g.
> junior-contractor, senior-contractor, customer-relations, etc
> 
> paul
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Jeff Bohren [mailto:jbohren@opennetwork.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 3:10 PM
> >To: Paul Madsen; provision@lists.oasis-open.org
> >Subject: RE: [provision] First cut at the SPML schema to use for the
> >interop
> >
> >
> >Paul,
> >
> >I agree that we need some kind of attribute to indicate
authorization.
> >This is why I was leary of trying to use an "alpha version" of a
> >standard schema for the interop demo. If we use an alpha version
> >standard schema, then we should limit ourself to attributes that
would
> >make sense in the final schema. If we use a custom schema, or a
custom
> >schema that extends the alpha version standard schema, then we
> >have more
> >more flexibility.
> >
> >How about "title" to perform authorization? That would make sense in
a
> >standard schema as well. If we do something like accesslevel or
> >contractlimit, then we really need to create a custom schema.
> >
> >Jeff Bohren
> >Product Architect
> >OpenNetwork Technologies, Inc
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Paul Madsen [mailto:p.madsen@entrust.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 2:57 PM
> >To: Jeff Bohren; provision@lists.oasis-open.org
> >Subject: RE: [provision] First cut at the SPML schema to use for the
> >interop
> >
> >
> >Hi Jeff, comments on first draft of interop schema
> >
> >1) I'd like to see an attribute that could carry some aspect of
> >authorization, e.g. role, level, userType etc. We need this
information
> >communicatetd in some manner so that we can subsequently apply
> >appropriate access control based on it.
> >
> >Although the 'description' attribute in the current schema could
serve,
> >given that the SPML messages will at some point likely be displayed
to
> >the attendees, it would be preferable to have a more logical name for
> >the attribute
> >
> >Perhaps we can avoid the issue of determining a list of meaningful
> >values for this attribute by using simple integer values, e.g.
> >
> ><attr name="accessLevel">
> >	<value>1|2|3|4|5</value>
> ></attr>
> >
> >or, perhaps more relevant to the scenario,
> >
> ><attr name="contractLimit">
> >	<value>1000|10,000|100,000</value>
> ></attr>
> >
> >2) only the 'cn' attribute is listed as required. Related to point 1)
-
> >we would need the 'accessLevel' attribute (or whatever it is called)
to
> >be required as well.) More generally, we should make all
> >attributes that
> >a PSP will 'use' to be required. I don't think we want to be in the
> >situation of saying 'well if you had set this attribute in the
> >form, you
> >would have seen ........'
> >
> >We will need to of course balance this against the usability issue of
> >having an attendee populating a long form with a wine glass in one
hand
> >and hor d'ouerves in another. Hopefully multiple PSPs will be able to
> >leverage shared attributes.
> >
> >Paul
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Jeff Bohren [mailto:jbohren@opennetwork.com]
> >>Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 10:22 PM
> >>To: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
> >>Subject: [provision] First cut at the SPML schema to use for
> >>the interop
> >>
> >>
> >>I apologize for just now getting to this. Attached is a first
> >>cut of an SPML schema for the interop.
> >>
> >>
> >>Jeff Bohren
> >>OpenNetwork Technologies
> >>
> >
> 
> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
> http://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/provision/members/leave_workgroup.php