RE: [xri] The elements formerly known as TargetAuthority and TargetSubject

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@cordance.net>]

To further amplify Will's points, the case for reusing ds:KeyInfo at both
levels is that the semantics for this element are defined by another spec
(XML dSig) anyway. So we actually: a) save work, b) gain greater
consistency, and c) reduce potential confusion by using the same element at
both the XRD and Link levels.

I believe the same is true with Subject, especially because ds:KeyInfo
already establishes and illustrates this pattern. Subject at the XRD level
describes the subject of the XRD; Subject at the Link level describes the
subject of the Link.

In both cases the semantics remain very precise, and the element only has to
be defined once. I believe this will lead to less, not more, confusion on
the part of XRD implementers, authors, and readers.

And the schema stays delightfully small - a sign we really are at the
"simplicity on the other side of complexity".

I'll put this on the agenda for tomorrow's telecon to see if we can close on
it.

=Drummond 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Will Norris [mailto:will@willnorris.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 2:55 PM
> To: XRI TC
> Cc: Nat Sakimura; Breno de Medeiros; Drummond Reed
> Subject: Re: [xri] The elements formerly known as TargetAuthority and
> TargetSubject
> 
> +1 on both element names proposed on that wiki page.  Even though this
> is a departure from the direction we were trying to go previously (not
> reusing elements of the same name in different places), I think this
> really does make a lot of sense.  One way that we could explain this
> in the spec to avoid potential confusion, is that with both elements
> (KeyInfo and Subject), they always apply to their direct parent
> element.  Both are always going to be direct child elements of either
> XRD or Link, and that is what they apply to.  I don't think it will
> actually be that confusing, and the simplification it brings to the
> schema is very nice.
> 
> -will
> 
> 
> On Jun 30, 2009, at 9:10 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:
> 
> > I finished the promised wiki page and posted it to:
> >
> > 	http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XrdOne/TrustElements
> >
> > As always, doing a full writeup of the functional definitions of the
> > elements shed surprising light on both of them. In fact it led to a
> > very
> > unexpected conclusion about their respective names, which I
> > guarantee will
> > surprise you.
> >
> > Please read it over and post your thoughts -- the sooner the better,
> > as this
> > is clearly an issue we must close before we are ready for a
> > Committee Draft.
> >
> > =Drummond
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:10 PM
> >> To: 'Nat Sakimura'; 'Breno de Medeiros'; 'XRI TC'
> >> Subject: RE: [xri] TargetAuthority and TargetSubject
> >>
> >> I had an action item from the last telecon to send a proposal wrt the
> >> element name TargetAuthority too.
> >>
> >> I have found that when it comes to the semantics of XML element
> >> names, it
> >> is
> >> best to try to derive the semantic name on the basis of a shared
> >> functional
> >> definitions and not the other way around.
> >>
> >> I have started drafting a wiki page to do this but need to head out
> >> to a
> >> series of meetings this afternoon - I'll post the page as soon as I
> >> get
> >> back.
> >>
> >> =Drummond
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php