[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xri] Groups - XRI Metadata 2.0 Working Draft 04 (Word) (wd-xri-metadata-04.doc) uploaded
Sorry to weigh in late on this. Here's the way it works in all 3 current drafts: 1) Per our conclusion in early January, the Syntax spec defines the $ namespace and says that it can be populated by a) XRI TC specs, b) other OASIS specs, or c) (using cross-references) other standards bodies. The Syntax spec also refers to: a) the Res spec for $ names for resolution, and b) the Metadata spec for $ names for XRI metadata. 2) The Metadata spec refers to the Syntax definition of the $ space, says that it (the Metadata spec) defines $ names for XRI metadata, and says that the Res spec defines all $ names for resolution under the top-level "$res". 3) The Res spec defines "$res" and all identifiers under it. I believe this delegation model is pretty clean. The Res spec can own "$res" forever. The Metadata spec can own $l, $d, $v, and $-. Other OASIS specs can share the $space as needed by spec'ing their own $ names and then going through the OASIS review process (which should be relatively easy to manage). And other standards bodies can establish and manage their own $ spaces use cross-references. =Drummond -----Original Message----- From: Peter C Davis [mailto:peter.davis@neustar.biz] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 1:56 PM To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [xri] Groups - XRI Metadata 2.0 Working Draft 04 (Word) (wd-xri-metadata-04.doc) uploaded On Wednesday 09 March 2005 04:26 pm, Wachob, Gabe wrote: > Peter- > I think that would be a little confusing, actually. I think in > metadata we are explicit that $ namespaces can be defined in other > specifications. We do *not* (I believe) reference *from* the metadata > spec to the resolution spec -- that was done to prevent a circular > dependency between metadata and rez. However, I'm fine with such > circular references and maybe that'd clear it up. > > If we don't want to change this, I'd be happy with the status > quo as well. > well, the MD spec does normatively (i think) ref Resolution already. so we've already made the dependancy. i'm ok w/it as is ... this DOES mean tho that we need the OASIS registry folks involved if other specs (outside XRI) can define these (we had language which had reserved the '$' namespace for XRI-TC use only. i do not recall seeing that in the MD spec (it used to be in the XRIv1.0 spec tho). --- peterd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: xri-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: xri-help@lists.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]