RE: [regrep] Re: Support for External Repository Items

["Breininger, Kathryn R" <kathryn.r.breininger@boeing.com>]

I agree with Joel's comment on the name change to "discoveryURL".  We really
are trying to say that this is the URL at which you will find the content
you are looking for.  "Discovery" implies searching, or even serendipity,
(stumbling upon something) and thus, discovering it!  Let's make it really
clear what this URL will provide.  LocationURL makes sense...

-----Original Message-----
From: Munter, Joel D [mailto:joel.d.munter@intel.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 3:42 PM
To: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [regrep] Re: Support for External Repository Items


Len, et al

With respect to the latest proposed change (ebRIM: from "contentURI" to
"discoveryURL"), I think the name is just wrong and does not fit the purpose
intended.  [with tongue in cheek...] I am excited to see UDDI terminology
making its way into more and more of the Oasis ebXML Registry specification
proposals.  Unfortunately, based on this pre-existing usage in UDDI and
related public documentation, I believe that the use of it in this context
in this proposal would only serve to confuse the Industry.  In this context,
as someone has already registered the information, you already know the URL.
You are not "discovering" it.  Have you considered naming it "locationURL?"

I have re-read the proposal and have the following questions.  
In your introduction you write: "...Other Registry team members are holding
the notion that every repository item will reside in the Registry and will
be accessible from its RegistryEntry instance by applying the ebRS
GetContentRequest registry service...".

I do not understand the portion of the statement that says "...repository
item will reside in the registry..."  I thought that repository items reside
in a registry.  I also thought that the v1 specifications separated the
registry from the repository.  That is a repository may be somewhere else.
I may be wrong here.

I strongly agree with the ambiguity in the items that you have cited.  I
have no strong opinion yet regarding whether I am an advocate for
InternalItems or ExternalItems.  If I fall on one side of the fence or the
other anytime soon, I'll let you know.

Joel


-----Original Message-----
From: Len Gallagher [mailto:LGallagher@nist.gov]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 2:45 PM
To: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [regrep] Re: Support for External Repository Items



Regrep members,

Attached is a revision of a proposal first distributed to this list on 
October 4. After comments to this list from Scott Hinkelman and personal 
off-line discussions with Nikola Stojanovic, it is clear that the attribute 
name "contentURI" is too ambiguous to be useful. This revised proposal 
changes it to "discoveryURL" in the Registry Information Model and changes 
it to "attachmentURI" when it is used in Registry Service XML elements for 
document submission or retrieval to reference a SOAP attachment.

-- Len


At 11:41 AM 10/5/01, Len Gallagher wrote:

>Regrep members,
>
>Attached is a short (3-page) issue and position paper that addresses the 
>topic of "How should our Registry handle the registration of repository 
>items that do not reside under the control of Registry Services?"
>
>One point of view is that all repository items are under the control of 
>the Registry, so we don't have a problem.
>
>Another point of view is that we can and should be able to create 
>RegistryEntry instances that describe a repository item that resides
elsewhere.
>
>The attached 3-page document discusses this issue, evaluates how our 
>Registry specifications handle both of these notions, and states my belief 
>that the Registry specifications should allow registration of external 
>repository items if the Registration Authority wants that to happen. I 
>present the outline of a proposal that would facilitate this capability.
>
>I'm making this proposal to the entire Registry team because I think it 
>impacts the deliberations of several of our sub-teams, especially query, 
>external scheme, and cooperating registries. I looked at the use cases 
>under cooperating registries and found that many of them would be 
>satisfied simply by allowing the Registry to register repository items 
>that live elsewhere. I think it's best to let the whole team see the issue 
>up front so that it can be discussed with input from all effected 
>sub-teams at the same time.
>
>-- Len

**************************************************************
Len Gallagher                             LGallagher@nist.gov
NIST                                      Work: 301-975-3251
Bldg 820  Room 562                        Home: 301-424-1928
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8970 USA           Fax: 301-948-6213
**************************************************************

----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>