Re: [uddi-spec] Use of UDDI.org as a means of promoting TC, UBR, Std Group and Consortium tModels and Value Sets

[Paul Denning <pauld@mitre.org>]

At 08:44 PM 2003-05-13, Luc Clement wrote:
>Please review this prototype.

The prototype has a section on "published tModels".

It has "Registered Location:".   I think "published" should imply to the UBR.

It is sort of like an IANA type of thing.  We're talking about "well-known" 
tModels.

What makes them "well-known"?  I think it is that they are published in the 
UBR.

If I have a v2 tModelKey assigned by the UBR, then I can use that tModelKey 
in a private UDDI registry.  That is, in a private UDDI registry I can 
create a tModel and give it the same tModelKey as the corresponding tModel 
published in the UBR.

That way, applications that are designed to discover services at runtime by 
searching a UDDI registry for a tModelBag (late binding) could use the same 
tModelKeys whether they search UBR or other private UDDI registries.

I also think that the "published tModels" section should be derived 
directly from the UBR.  If I search UBR for tModels whose categoryBag 
include keyValue="categorization" for the uddi-org:types taxonomy, I should 
be able to get the same information.

You would probably want some method of scrubbing the UBR data such that the 
tModels you highlight on the proposed uddi.org page would not contain bogus 
taxonomies.  I don't think you want to limit it to only those taxonomies 
that are "checked" by UBR.  So some "unchecked" taxonomies should be allowed.

Proposed criteria for highlighting on uddi.org:
1.  tModel published in UBR
2.  tModel categoryBag includes uddi-org:types "categorization"
3.  tModel categoryBag includes either uddi-org:types "checked" or "unchecked"
4.  tModel overviewURL is not a broken link or empty.
5.  tModel overviewURL retrieval returns an "appropriate" representation 
(see below)

A TN should describe what is an appropriate representation for the 
overviewURL, like wsdlSpec points to WSDL.

The TN for providing a taxonomy in UDDI v2 [1] currently does not say much 
about describing the taxonomy.  Perhaps that TN should be updated to 
specify that the overviewURL points to something like RDDL [2], which would 
be a human readable document with machine readable links like <xhtml:a 
rddl:nature="..." and rddl:purpose="..." href="...">.  The href could point 
to an XML document that contains the value set, and rddl:nature could refer 
to its format.  Various formats could be considered "appropriate" since 
UDDI Spec TC will not have time to define (and agree upon) one.  If UDDI 
Spec TC does come up with a new XSD for external taxonomies, then it can be 
added to the list of "appropriate" rddl:nature's.  If someone has a 
taxonomy that is "unchecked" in UBR, but "checked" in a private UDDI 
registry, then they may be able to publish an appropriate href on the 
Web.  For example, if using Systinet WASP UDDI, we might have 
rddl:nature="http://www.systinet.com/uddi/web/doc/uddi/taxonomy.xsd"

Anne suggested a UDDI registry separate from UBR to store the set of 
approved tModels.  I don't like this idea (see criterion 1 above).  I want 
to be able to search UBR for the criteria listed above and derive the same 
list of tModels that appear on uddi.org.

UDDI Spec TC should build its page using tools that search UBR for tModels 
matching these criteria.  This implies that these tools follow 
(dereference) the overviewURL, and check it against whatever is deemed 
"appropriate".  If its RDDL, then the tools would also need to follow the 
appropriate href's, and perhaps validate the XML against a schema 
(identified via rddl:nature).  Doing this extra level of checking should 
weed out most if not all of the junk in UBR (at least as far as getting a 
good list of taxonomy tModels).

UDDI v3 tModels could have a useType="rddl" for an overviewURL that points 
to RDDL.  Might also want to update the v3 value set TN [3].

[1] 
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/tn/uddi-spec-tc-tn-taxonomy-provider-v100-20010717.htm
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0213
[3] 
http://oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/tn/uddi-spec-tc-tn-valuesetprovider-20030212.htm

Paul