Re: [regrep] Issue with UUID's for Core Components and BIE's

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Farrukh,

OK.

Then some further suggestions - define a default classification for
a LID - that is used if one is not provided - something like
"registry-system-reference" or such (this is probably handy
anyway for a bunch of other stuff!).  I've actually found
that RR should ship with some default classifications built-in
for system admin' purposes - this could be part of those -
and you could give non-normative notes on these for
implementers.

In a similar vein - if you are going to autogenerate LIDs
for people - they should be able to associate a prefix
alias with their user profile - to be used when creating those
default LIDs.  This also works great for people working
for a customer - (say USPS) - then they will simply get
the next available LID in that series - by association.

When they setup an account this should be part of
the configuration dialogue required.

Thanks, DW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
To: "David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>
Cc: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: [regrep] Issue with UUID's for Core Components and BIE's


> David RR Webber wrote:
>
> >Farrukh,
> >
> >I still think its better to upgrade the External ID.
> >
> >And less confusing -if you have two things doing
> >related and overlapping things - which do people
> >pick - or do they put the same value in both
> >places - probably - and therefore its a clue
> >it should be just one field.
> >
> >
> I agree that similar but different things are confusing and bad.
> I have found that ExternalIdentifiers are the least used feature of
> RIM. I personally do not like them the way they are. I think it would
> have been better to have their type be Slot. In other words a
RegistryObject
> has an externalIdentifiers attribute that is a Collection of Slots and
also
> a Slots attribute that is a Collection of Slots. The first has a
> specific meaning
> (external identiofiers) while the later could have any meaning wahtsoever.
>
> I absolutely do not like the fact that to have a simple value such as a
> LID you need
> to define a LID ClassificationScheme.
>
> Also ExternalIdentifier is an extensibility mechanism similar to Slots
> that can be
> just about anything. While the LID is a much tighter first class part of
> the model
> similar to id. It is just so fundemental and basic taht we want it to be
> reachable by the most direct path.
>
> >Not sure this should be mandatory - blanks
> >should be allowed - since people may insert
> >content that does not need a LID - or may
> >choose to assign one at some later point
> >in the process.
> >
> >
> According to the proposal a LID is required but if the client does not
> provide it the registry generates one.
> Things like IDs logical or otherwise should not be late bound in my
> opinion. There are too many issues
> that crop up when you do that.
>
> >I'm completely baffled as to why you think a
> >separate LID field is more efficient - queries
> >should be just as fast either way.
> >
> >
> Because it is part of the object and does not require a join of two
> objects to assemble it (say in a relational model).
> It is fetched in the same access as teh rest of the object. That said I
> am not a big fanb of premature optimizations.
>
> >Also - surely everything inserted into the registry
> >requires a classification so - I'm not seeing any
> >difference here?
> >
> >
> Actually my experience is that most things in the registry are not
> classified.
>
> >Thanks, DW.
> >
> >----- Original Message ----- 
> >From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
> >To: "David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>
> >Cc: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
> >Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 3:56 PM
> >Subject: Re: [regrep] Issue with UUID's for Core Components and BIE's
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>David RR Webber wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Farrukh,
> >>>
> >>>Why not overlay the LID functionality on the External ID?
> >>>
> >>>No need to change the RIM then - and this is in any case
> >>>the behaviour the External ID was intending to have all
> >>>along  ; -)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Good observation David.
> >>
> >>I considered that very point but decided against it because every object
> >>needs to have a LID (like an id) and given
> >>that ExternalId requires a ClassificationScheme it seemed better for
> >>queries to
> >>introduce a new attribute. It would also be more efficient for storage
> >>and retrieval.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Thanks, DW.
> >>>
> >>>----- Original Message ----- >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Please see the latest Versioning proposal posted after Nikola and I
> >>>>worked on the last one. The Logical ID (LID) addresses the
> >>>>need for a human friendly ID. Check it out at:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
>
>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/download.php/6326/Vers
i
> >>
> >>
> >onControlProposal-03.doc
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>-- 
> >>>>Regards,
> >>>>Farrukh
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster
of
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>the OASIS TC), go to
> >>>
> >>>
>
>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgrou
p
> >>
> >>
> >.php.
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>-- 
> >>Regards,
> >>Farrukh
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Farrukh
>
>
>