RE: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: XML Namespace URIs

[Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>]

My main concern with use of a version identifier in the namespace URI is 
that it
will be abused or worse, that there will be a tendancy to change it to 
correspond with 
the version of the spec/standard which is something with which I have a 
fundamental 
disagreement.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
phone: +1 508 377 9295

"Gilbert Pilz" <Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com> wrote on 07/14/2005 01:38:18 PM:

> Peter,
> 
> You and Chris seem to be in agreement on the basic form of the URLs. The
> only thing you don't seem to agree on is the form of the version
> information. Chris indicated to the editors earlier that he preferred to
> use a date stamp to indicate version. You'll have to ask him about his
> reasons for this preference. I don't care one way or another.
> 
> I think its important, though, that we create an AI to talk to whomever
> is responsible for the OASIS site and make sure that they are willing
> and able to create documents that correspond to the URLs that we are
> proposing.
> 
> Also, I am still working on the "XML Namespace URI Versioning Policy"
> issue. I'll send it to the list when I get the proposal worked out.
> 
> - g
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Niblett [mailto:peter_niblett@uk.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 5:26 AM
> To: Gilbert Pilz
> Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: XML Namespace URIs
> 
> In the WS-Notification and WS-Resource Framework specifications we have
> adopted a more concise version of the URIs. This was to avoid bloat of
> things that embed the uri, like wsa:Action MAPs. We also chose to omit
> the date, and instead append a version number that increments if and
> when the namespace changes incompatibility (I know this is an area where
> there can be much debate).
> 
> Also the current draft of the naming guidelines states that URLs SHOULD
> be rooted at the docs domain, and the tcShortName MUST be the next node
> in the URL after the base.
> 
> Have you considered using the WSN / WSRF convention? It would mean that
> the namespace URIs would be
> 
> 
> 
>       xmlns:wsrm="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrx/rm-1";
> 
> 
>       xmlns:wsrmp="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrx/rmp-1";
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peter Niblett
> WS-Notification TC co-chair
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>              "Gilbert Pilz"
> 
>              <Gilbert.Pilz@bea
> 
>              .com>
> To 
>                                        <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
>              14/07/2005 05:24
> cc 
> 
> 
> 
> Subject 
>                                        [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: XML Namespace
> 
>                                        URIs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Title: XML Namespace URIs
> 
> 
> Description: We need to decide upon the normative XML namespace URIs
> that must be used by implementations of these specifications.
> 
> 
> Justification: Self-evident.
> 
> 
> Target: all
> 
> 
> Type: editorial
> 
> 
> Proposal: The namespace URIs for WS-RX-defined schemas should be URLs
> that resolve to RDDL documents that provide information about the schema
> as well as links to the corresponding specification(s). Per OASIS
> guidelines, the RDDL documents must be hosted by OASIS. Therefore the
> exact URL values will need to be co-ordinated with OASIS but, in
> general, they should look something like the following:
> 
> 
> 
> xmlns:wsrm="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ws-rx/wsreliablemessagi
> ng-200507.html
>       "
> 
> 
> 
> xmlns:wsrmp="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ws-rx/wsrmpolicy-20050
> 7.html"
> 
> 
> Note that the "200507" in the URL is represents the schema version as a
> date (July, 2005).
> 
>