[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [uddi-spec-comment] Public Comment
Hi Karthick, You don't need to do the nested representation. In your case, the categoryBag can be represented as given below, for classifying an UDDI entity (e.g. businessEntity or service) by a category named 'Bovinea'. . <categoryBag> <keyedReference tModelKey="uddi:biology.org:categorizationgroup:living_thing_class" keyName="SubFamily Name" keyValue="Bovinea"/> </categoryBag> . Note: In the above example keyValue is supposed to be unique and the underlying registry figures out the category based on the keyValue. Thanks, - Rajesh Koilpillai _____ From: Karthick Sankarachary [mailto:karthick.sankarachary@webmethods.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 2:06 PM To: Rajesh@infravio.com; uddi-spec-comment@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [uddi-spec-comment] Public Comment Hi Rahesh, Thanks for that quick response! However, judging by the description in section F.2 of UDDI v3.0.2, or least going by its use cases, it's not immediately clear if I can do this (to represent the taxonomy in question): <categoryBag> <keyedReferenceGroup tModelKey= "uddi:biology.org:categorizationgroup:living_thing_class"> <keyedReference tModelKey="uddi:uddi-org:general_keywords" keyName="Class Name" keyValue="Mammalia"/> <keyedReferenceGroup tModelKey= "uddi:biology.org:categorizationgroup:living_thing_order"> <keyedReference tModelKey="uddi:uddi-org:general_keywords" keyName="Order Name" keyValue="Astiodactyla"/> <keyedReferenceGroup tModelKey= "uddi:biology.org:categorizationgroup:living_thing_family"> <keyedReference tModelKey="uddi:uddi-org:general_keywords" keyName="Family Name" keyValue="Bovidea"/> <keyedReferenceGroup tModelKey= "uddi:biology.org:categorizationgroup:living_thing_subfamily"> <keyedReference tModelKey="uddi:uddi-org:general_keywords" keyName="SubFamily Name" keyValue="Bovinea"/> </keyedReferenceGroup> </keyedReferenceGroup> </keyedReferenceGroup> </keyedReferenceGroup> </categoryBag> Best Regards, Karthick Sankarachary Lead Software Engineer P +91 80 5125 8908 | F +91 80 5125 8901 <http://www.webmethods.com/> www.webMethods.com _____ From: Rajesh Koilpillai [mailto:rajesh@infravio.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 12:59 PM To: ksankara@webmethods.com; uddi-spec-comment@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [uddi-spec-comment] Public Comment Hi Karthick, It is possible to define a hierarchy of categories for a user-defined taxonomy, kindly check section F.2 Grouping Categories in the UDDI v3.0.2 specification which talks about how categories are represented within a keyedReferenceGroup. keyedReferenceGroup provides a logical grouping for the keyedReferences defined within them. The tModelKey within a keyedReference uniquely identifies the taxonomy. The keyName within a keyedReference uniquely identifies the category name. The keyValue within a keyedReference uniquely identifies the category value. So as for as inquiry is concerned the current representation works fine. But there is no standard representation for defining taxonomy with a hierarchy of categories currently in the specification. But each registry vendor provides a custom mechanism to populate user defined taxonomies with a hierarchy of categories. We don't think there is a necessity to modify the schema for keyedReferences as this is applicable only for inquiry and is not relevant during taxonomy creation. Hope it's clear. Thanks, - Rajesh Koilpillai -----Original Message----- From: comment-form@oasis-open.org [mailto:comment-form@oasis-open.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 11:52 AM To: uddi-spec-comment@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [uddi-spec-comment] Public Comment Comment from: ksankara@webmethods.com Name: Karthick Sankarachary Title: Lead Engineer Organization: webMethods, Inc. Regarding Specification: UDDI V3.0 Correct me if I'm wrong, but by the looks of the latest specification, it is not possible to define a hierarchy of categories, or to be more precise, a taxonomy. I can't really use derived categories to represent a hierarchy, because by definition, the categories in a taxonomy may and will be unrelated to each other. To illustrate my use case, please take a look see at the taxonomy at http://www.rarespecies.org.na/InfoSys/IMAGES/buffalo/Taxonomy.gif. I think our best bet is keyedRefereceGroup. Unfortunately, it is not recursive and only allows for one level of nesting of categories, by virtue of the fact that a keyedReferenceGroup cannot contain another keyedReferenceGroup. So, that begs the question, would it at all be possible to change the type of keyedReferenceGroup like so: <xsd:complexType name="keyedReferenceGroup" final="restriction"> <xsd:sequence minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xsd:choice> <xsd:element ref="uddi:keyedReference"/> <xsd:element ref="uddi:keyedReferenceGroup"/> <xsd:choice> </xsd:sequence> <xsd:attribute name="tModelKey" type="uddi:tModelKey" use="required"/> </xsd:complexType> Best Regards, Karthick Sankarachary --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: uddi-spec-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: uddi-spec-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]