[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [no subject]
3) Jurisdiction: We need to specify in which jurisdiction this contract = is governed.=20 4) date: we need date in the contract 5) dsig: Digital Signature of some form.=20 =20 Any thoughts?=20 =20 Nat ------=_NextPart_000_0128_01C441AE.745E7980 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dus-ascii"> <TITLE>Message</TITLE> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Hello=20 XDI'ers,</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>If I=20 understand it correctly, the difference between <link> and=20 <resource> isn't as much if it's cached as if the containing = resource is=20 the "owner" of the contained resource (they're often the same, but it's = a subtle=20 difference).</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>The=20 presence or absence of a LinkContract governing the relationship = provides the=20 same information, and I'm with you - the XML doesn't need to be = different based=20 on this characteristic of the relationship.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>This=20 is similar to my argument that the XRI identifier shouldn't be different = because=20 of this characteristic of the relationship.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Not=20 to diminish the importance of this characteristic, it's just that = neither the=20 identifier nor the XML tag should change when this attribute of the = relationship=20 (inevitably) changes.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>As=20 far as your proposal for LinkContract portion, I see two different=20 threads:</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20 class=3D714433323-24052004>1) Where does it go within the XDI document,=20 and</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20 class=3D714433323-24052004>2) What is its=20 structure</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20 class=3D714433323-24052004></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20 class=3D714433323-24052004>I propose we handle these in two separate = email threads=20 because each has a life of it's own.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20 class=3D714433323-24052004></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff=20 size=3D2>=3DLoren</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D714433323-24052004><FONT face=3DTahoma = color=3D#0000ff=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader lang=3Den-us dir=3Dltr = align=3Dleft><FONT face=3DTahoma=20 size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Sakimura, Nat=20 [mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 19, 2004 = 7:55=20 PM<BR><B>To:</B> xdi@lists.oasis-open.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> [xdi] What = is=20 "link" after all?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT size=3D2>Before going any = further, I=20 wanted to come back to this point once again. Since people who were not = present=20 at NOLA f2f did not have a chance to get involved in the lengthy = discussion=20 there, I think it is worthwhile to revisit it online. = </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT = size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT size=3D2>So, what is "link" = after all?=20 </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT = size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT size=3D2>If I remember = correctly, the=20 main difference from <resource> and <link> in Drummond's = model is=20 that the later is the cached copy of the former. In another word,=20 <resource> is authoritative, and <link> is not. Is that = right?=20 </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT = size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>If it is the=20 real reason, then IMHO it is not a very strong reason to difine = <link> as=20 the first class object, but some attribute of it e.g. <resource=20 status=3D"non-authoritative"> would do. </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>I have always=20 viewd the "Contract" a very important feature of XNS because it is a = touch point=20 of the cyber world and the real world. To be acceptable as a legal = contract, it=20 should have certain qualities, and I believe "Link Contract" should = satisfy=20 them. This means that we have to impose certain structure to it: more = than just=20 what has been discribed in Drummond's draft. This precicely is the = reason why I=20 drew up a version which had much more structure in it. = </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>Let me extract=20 my version of the "LinkContract" from the uploaded meta-schema for the=20 readability. </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2><element=20 name=3D"LinkContract"><BR> <complexContent><BR> = =20 <extension base=3D"Resource"><BR> =20 <sequence><BR> <element=20 name=3D"parties"=20 type=3D"Xri"><BR>  = ;=20 <complexType><BR> &n= bsp; =20 <sequence><BR>  = ; =20 <element name=3D"party"=20 type=3D"Xri"<BR> &nb= sp; =20 minOccurs=3D"2"=20 maxOccurs=3D"unbounded"/><BR>  = ; =20 </sequence><BR> &nbs= p;=20 </complexType><BR> =20 </element><BR> <element=20 name=3D"jurisdiction" type=3D"Xri" = /><BR> =20 <element name=3D"templateID" type=3D"Xri"=20 /><BR> <element name=3D"date" = type=3D"Xri"=20 /><BR> <element name=3D"dsig"=20 type=3D"ds:Signature" /><BR> =20 </sequence><BR> =20 </extension><BR> </complexContent><BR></element></= FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>I wrote it as=20 an extension to Resource, but equally, it could be a stand alone = element. What I=20 would like to discuss in this thread is not the construction of the = schema=20 (there are many ways to represent objects in XML schema, as you know), = but on=20 what kind of information the "Link Contract" should have. = </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>From the above,=20 you probably can see that I am proposing following things to be included = in the=20 "Link Contract". </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>1) XRI of the=20 parties involved. In any contract, we need to specify the parties = involed.=20 </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>2) templateID:=20 this points to the contract template, in which other information like = parties=20 can be inserted to make it a complete contract. </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>3)=20 Jurisdiction: We need to specify in which jurisdiction this contract is=20 governed. </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>4) date: we=20 need date in the contract</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>5) dsig:=20 Digital Signature of some form. </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック" size=3D2>Any thoughts?=20 </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D066513202-20052004><FONT face=3D"ＭＳ = Ｐゴシック"=20 size=3D2>Nat</FONT></SPAN></DIV></BODY></HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0128_01C441AE.745E7980--
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]