Re: [wsdm] WS-RF Resources vs. WSDM Resources

[fred carter <fred.carter@amberpoint.com>]

(I tried to stay out of this as long as possible.  Oh well...)

I don't understand the fuss about this.  WSRF defines a WS-Resource to be whatever they define it to be.  Those needing further explication can consult the references or complain vociferiously to that august body.

WSDM defines a WSDM Resource (really a WSDM WS-Resource) to be WS-Resources needful of management, analogous to how some bank might define a resource needful of money stuff.  Doing such a thing allows us to make statements of the following form with a relatively straight face (which is scary enough).

In our example, we show how to manage a printer. The manageability endpoint for the printer have a WSDM Resource which represents the printer.  Associate with the WSDM resources is, of course, a resource properties document that has information about the resource consumption (amount of paper, level of cyan ink, etc.).

Seems like we can go ape about the word all we want, but it's all pretty obvious from context.

/fred
// now going back into resist-the-resource-discussion mode

Wilson, Kirk D wrote:

One of the things we would like to do in WSDM 1.1 is to make sure that when the text refers to a resource, it is clear whether the reference is to a WS-RF Resource or a WSDM Resource.  The fundamental difference between the two, as I believe has been discussed, is that a WS-RF Resource is a “logical entity”, well, something abstract, whereas a WSDM is anything that is of interest to manage.  As editor of the MOWS spec, I started this AI to make sure the text was correct and consistent by looking at the so-called “mind-map” in section 2.4 of the MOWS spec.  The most significant thing that the diagram does over the corresponding (but slightly different diagram in section 2.3 of MUWS Part 1) is to make a Web service endpoint a “resource”.  Is that really what we want it to say—isn’t the “resource” under MOWS the Web service that is being managed, not its endpoint.  At any rate, the use of the “resource” still left open the whole question of what is the relationship between a WS-RF Resource or a WSDM Resource—which is it?

 

Also, I believe we have eliminated the notion of the “manageability capability interface” as a specifically specified “thing” that represents 1 manageability capability in recent decisions about what a Manageability Capability is. Is that correct, Bryan?  At least, it seems to be a subtlety that could be eliminated.

 

So, I have attached another mind-map, which, IMHO, better expresses the relationship of Resource, WSDM Resource and WS-RF Resource.  By just “Resource”, I refer to one of the general definitions of “resource”, e.g.,  IETF, W3C, or an RDF-definition. Comments would be appreciated—if only to make sure I’m on the right track.

 

This is also a “straw” poll for what to do about section 2.4 of MOWS?

 

1. Keep the section and diagram as it current is?
2. Replace with it with the attached (perhaps with minor tweaks)
3. Whack the section and forget about having a “mind-map”.

 

Kirk Wilson
Computer Associates

Architect, Development
Office of the CTO
Tele: + 1 802 765-4337
Fax:   + 1 802 765-4339
<mailto:kirk.wilson@ca.com>

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php