wsdm message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsdm] Events metadata; Object now or comment after its in MUWS
- From: Steve Graham <sggraham@us.ibm.com>
- To: "Vambenepe, William N" <vbp@hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:07:47 -0500
3 topics, 3 different events does not
sound like the best approach to me. Therefore I would prefer (1)
++++++++
Steve Graham
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, On Demand Architecture
Member, IBM Academy of Technology
<Soli Deo Gloria/>
++++++++
"Vambenepe, William N" <vbp@hp.com>
wrote on 11/19/2004 12:15:24 PM:
> They don't have to be. As long as we pick on definition and are clear
about it.
>
> 1) One definition is to say that an event is
defined by a "content" GED period. The
> fact that that event can be associated with multiple topics doesn't
change the fact
> that it's the same event.
>
> 2) Another definition is to say that an event
is defined by the association of a
> topic and a "content" GED. That's the one I proposed below.
In this definition, if
> the same content GED is associated with 3 different topics that makes
3 different events.
>
> Either is fine by me, but we need to clearly
state what an event is.
>
> In the spec right now I have version (2) but
I can easily switch to (1) if this is
> what the group prefers.
>
> We need to decide on that first (what is an "event")
before we decide on what
> metadata an event has.
>
> William
>
> From: Steve Graham [mailto:sggraham@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 5:02 AM
> To: Vambenepe, William N
> Cc: Heather Kreger; wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [wsdm] Events metadata; Object now or comment after its
in MUWS
>
> are events strictly associated with at most one topic?
>
> should the @topic be a list?
> <event topic="list of any URI"
> ++++++++
> Steve Graham
> (919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
> STSM, On Demand Architecture
> Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> <Soli Deo Gloria/>
> ++++++++
>
>
>
> "Vambenepe, William N" <vbp@hp.com>
> 11/18/2004 06:44 PM
>
> To
>
> Heather Kreger/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, <wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org>
>
> cc
>
> Steve Graham/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
>
> Subject
>
> RE: [wsdm] Events metadata; Object now or comment after its in MUWS
>
>
>
>
> Heather,
>
> I am trying to picture a metadata document with a bunch of these <event>
elements
> in it. How do I tell what event each of these elements relate to?
Which begs the
> larger question: what is an event.
>
> In our spec, whenever we define an event we do so by selecting a topic
and a GED to
> represent the content of this event. So it seems to me that our definition
of an
> event is something uniquely identified by a URI (topic), a GED (content)
and a
> description of the semantics in human-readable (at least geek-readable)
form.
>
> Based on this, I think the event metadata element you propose would
look better like this:
>
> <event topic="any URI" content="xs:QName">
> <situationCategory> ws-muws:category</situationCategory>
?
> <severity>xs:short<severity> ?
> {any} *
> </event>
> With @topic and @content being required so I know what event this
metadata is about.
>
> Also, if we go with this proposal can you show us what the topic document
would
> look like? Like would be in topic/@messageType?
>
> William
>
>
> From: Heather Kreger [mailto:kreger@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 2:42 PM
> To: wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Cc: Steve Graham
> Subject: [wsdm] Events metadata; Object now or comment after its in
MUWS
>
>
> I had an outstanding action item to look into using topics and message
patterns to
> convey information that managers would need to know about expected
events ahead of
> time. Here are our conclusions:
>
> While it is possible to advertise the values of this information in
messagePattern
> of a topic, the XPath would be very complicated and Igor's complaints
about the
> amount of processing and reverse engineering to infer the category
and severity
> would be valid. We are really trying to advertise information
ABOUT the event, not
> a broad shape or signature of the message. Instead it seems much cleaner
to
> advertise with the resource, who is already advertising events to
be issued, some
> of the important values to be expected by the manager in the event.
This enables
> managers to find all events that will be emitted in a particular situationCategry
> or severity. It also makes it very clear what additional elements
are being added
> into the WEF's open content. I think this ties to the topics
work today very
> neatly without makeing very complex messagePatterns.
>
> Therefore, I'd like to propose the following metadata for events emitted
from
> manageable resources:
>
> Events are emitted from manageable resources in the form of WSDM Event
Format
> [WSDMEventFormat]. The event metadata element describes the
types of events that
> can be emitted and hints on how the WSDM Event Format will be constructed.
>
> The form of the event element is extended as shown here.
>
> <xs:element name=’event’>
> <xs:complexType>
> <xs:sequence>
> <xs:element name=’situationCategory’
type=’ws-muws:category’
> minOccurs=’0’/>
> <xs:element name=’severity’ type=’xs:short’
> minOccurs=’0’/>
> <xs:element name=’messagePattern’
type=’xs:QName’
> minOccurs=’0’/>
> <xs:any namespace=’##other’
> minOccurs=’0’
maxOccurs=’unbounded’/>
> </xs:sequence>
> </xs:complexType>
> </xs:element>
>
>
>
> <event>
> <situationCategory> ws-muws:category</situationCategory>
?
> <severity>xs:short<severity> ?
> <messagePattern>xs:QName</messagePattern>
?
> {any} *
> </event>
>
>
>
> /mrp:event/situationCategory
> The value that will appear in the situationCategory element of the
situation
> element of WSDM Event Format events of this type, with potential values
as defined
> in [WSDMBaseEvent].
>
> /mrp:event/severity
> The value that will appear in the severity element of the WSDM Event
Format events
> of this type, with potential values as defined in [WSDMBaseEvent].
>
> /mrp:event/messagePattern
> The value that will be the QName of the schema element expected in
the open content
> model for the WSDM base event. This value will also appear in the
messagePattern
> for the Topic for the event.
>
> This is an open content model, so additional, domain specific, relevant
information
> in the events could be advertised.
>
> Given the timeframe,
> I propose that if there are not objections on Friday by COB EST, that
this be added
> to MUWS. Of course, you can still comment during the comment period.
>
> Heather Kreger
> STSM, Web Services Lead Architect for SWG Emerging Technologies
> Author of "Java and JMX: Building Manageable Systems"
> kreger@us.ibm.com
> 919-543-3211 (t/l 441) cell:919-496-9572
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]