[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: followup on DDC conf call
I've guessed at Eric's email; I won't try guessing at Angela's (Bob, please forward). Here are my summary notes of our very pleasant and informative conference call of earlier today; I've appended our current scenarios document. Dewey Conf Call 10 Nov 1999 attending: Terry Allen, Commerce One (OASIS Regrep TC Chairman) Angela Chen, IBM Ron Daniel, DATAFUSION (Invited Expert, OASIS Regrep TC) Eric Miller, OCLC Office of Research Joan Mitchell, OCLC Forest Press Bob Sutor, IBM (XML.org) Diane Vizine-Goertz, OCLC Office of Research Introductions. Terry describes Regrep TC goals, need for a subject taxonomy. Bob describes XML.org goals, and elaborates on what XML.org is doing and has planned. Angela describes her role (senior at MIT, prototyping a Registry and Repository for XML.org). Ron describes what DATAFUSION is doing. Joan is Editor-in-Chief of DDC, also Executive Director of OCLC Forest Press (in which role she is interested in licensing DDC). It has been licensed for use in several Web apps. Diane has been involved in using the electronic version of Dewey and its use, including a future Web-based version of DDC. Eric is a scientist, working on RDF, Dublin Core, wants to understand more of what the Regrep TC is up to; there may be some overlap with Further discussion of Regrep functionality and business model, both the OASIS TC spec and XML.org. A serious issue is how to avoid exposing all of DDC for scraping, thus risking compromising OCLC's present business model. Additional discussion on how to use parts of DDC without exposing it all. Terry to forward Regrep scenarios to this group; send Eric the classification scheme DTD. Business issues: Has OASIS done this before? No. If OASIS were to license DDC, what rights would XML.org sponsors have? None. OCLC's price list is for libraries, for specific uses; pricing based on either usage or uses. OCLC has been thinking about Web licensing issues for over a year, and has some proposals for other projects. Eric says OCLC has been working on taxonomy services that apps can bind to; a possible means of avoiding illicit use. Discussion of mechanics of this method, and what in particular it's good for; Eric will send examples. regards, Terry
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html> <head> <title>OASIS Registry and Repository Use Scenarios</title> <meta name="generator" content="DocBook XSL Stylesheets V0.17"> </head> <body> <h1 > <a name="N236">OASIS Registry and Repository Use Scenarios</a> </h1> <p><a href="index.html">Back to OASIS Member's-Only Registry and Repository Technical Committee Home Page</a></p> <h3>Revision History</h3> <dl> <dt>Revision 0.2 , 16 August 1999 , TA </dt> <dd>Broken out from draft tech spec. </dd> </dl> <dl> <dt>Revision 0.3 , 19 October 1999 , TA </dt> <dd>reorganized; amplified scenario for submission with deposit. </dd> </dl> <hr> <p> <b>Table of Contents</b> </p> <dl> <dt> <a href="#obdtd">1. Obtaining a DTD Automatically</a> </dt> <dt> <a href="#depentity">2. Depositing an XML-Related Entity</a> </dt> <dt> <a href="#regentity">3. Registering an XML-Related Entity without Deposit</a> </dt> <dt> <a href="#browse">4. Browsing or Searching for a DTD</a> </dt> </dl> <p> These scenarios involve both users retrieving something from the repository and contributors registering something in the registry, which may involve depositing something in the repository. </p> <h2 > <a name="obdtd"><b>1. Obtaining a DTD Automatically</b></a> </h2> <p> A user or user agent retrieves an XML-related entity such as a DTD automatically over the Web, as a result of some use of it in an XML context. </p> <p> <b>Motivation.</b> Unless everything needed for parsing and displaying a document under all circumstances is packaged with the document itself, the document must refer to something (DTD, style sheet, public text) by identifier. It is necessary to be able to retrieve the referred-to entity, and in the Web context, it is preferrable to be able to do this automatically. </p> <p> <b>Example A.</b> A user is sent a document the DOCTYPE declaration of which refers to a DTD by unique identifier (URN, PI, or FPI). His parser tells him it can't find the DTD, so he goes out and retrieves it manually from a repository (he doesn't need the registry interface because he has a unique ID but he does need to know where to find the repository). </p> <p> <b>Example B.</b> A user clicks on a link to the stockmarket news and his browser receives an XML document the DOCTYPE declaration of which refers to a DTD by unique identifier; his browser, which has no copy locally, retrieves it automatically from the repository. </p> <h2 > <a name="depentity"><b>2. Depositing an XML-Related Entity</b></a> </h2> <p> A creator of an XML-related entity deposits it, possibly along with related data, for service to the public, at some range of accessibility from archival (retrieval rate could be slow) to utility (retrieval rate must be fast, large number of connections should be supported, round-the-clock uptime with failover, etc.). </p> <p> <b>Motivation.</b> Many creators of XML entities lack the facilities to serve them reliably; even those that can do so may not wish to deal with the burden. </p> <p> <b>Example A.</b> An IETF working group decides that a DTD that is part of their specification, but which the IETF has no facilities to serve, should be available from a public Web server with high bandwidth, and doesn't want to have to maintain the server. It sends the DTD to a repository and the repository serves it, as in the first scenario. </p> <p> <b>Example B.</b> A consortium or consultancy wishes its DTDs to be available for inspection and display. It deposits the DTDs, along with their documentation and sample instances, in a repository and provides appropriate metadata for the repository's registry interface. The owner of the repository undertakes to make them available (but not with a high guaranteed quality of service). </p> <p> <b>Example C.</b> Rosetta Net, a (real life) consortium of hardware vendors and suppliers, develops UML models, DTDs, and sets of text values used in their content, all expected to be in heavy demand, the text values to change frequently. It deposits the UML models (as XMI), DTDs, and the initial set of text values in a repository, contracts for a regular update schedule and the highest available quality of service, and the repository undertakes to serve them, update them as agreed, push updates to subscribers, and maintain high quality of service for retrieval requests. Rosetta Net doesn't need a registry interface for this purpose because everything is to happen automatically, but it provides appropriate registry metadata so that the DTDs can be browsed and searched. </p> <p> <b>Example D.</b> The Air Transport Association, which maintains important DTDs but make them available only to its members, wishes to offload the work of supplying those DTDs. It deposits the DTDs in a repository, contracts for service as in Example C, and in addition arranges that the DTDs are listed in the registry interface but are available only when an appropriate credential is presented in connection with a request for them. (This is an application of access control.) </p> <h2 > <a name="regentity"><b>3. Registering an XML-Related Entity without Deposit</b></a> </h2> <p>The owner of an XML-related entity, or another repository, registers the entity in the OASIS-sponsored registry, but does not deposit the entity itself. </p> <p> <b>Motivation.</b> Registries can interoperate to increase useability, but the actual storage location of an entity alone should not restrict the content of a registry. </p> <p> <b>Example A.</b> A company wishes to makes its DTDs visible in the OASIS-sponsored registry, but prefers to serve them itself. It submits appropriate registry documents to the OASIS-sponsored registry, including a pointer to the address from which it serves the DTDs, and agrees with the OASIS-sponsored registry that it will supply timely update information and that the OASIS-sponsored registry will update its records and interface in a timely manner. </p> <p> <b>Example B.</b> A special-purpose registry wishes to makes its content visible in the OASIS-sponsored registry, while maintaining that content in its own repository. It submits appropriate registry documents to the OASIS-sponsored registry, including a pointer to its repository, and agrees with the OASIS-sponsored registry that it will supply timely update information and that the OASIS-sponsored registry will update its records and interface in a timely manner. </p> <h2 > <a name="browse"><b>4. Browsing or Searching for a DTD</b></a> </h2> <p> A user ready to compose an XML document searches for a DTD that covers the subject of the document. </p> <p> <b>Motivation.</b> Every day in newsgroups and e-mail discussion lists such as <tt>comp.text.sgml</tt>, <tt>comp.text.xml</tt>, and <tt>xml-dev</tt> people ask whether there is a DTD for some subject area or functional purpose. The number of such queries will grow if XML is widely adopted. Somehow they have to be answered if wheel reinvention is to be minimized. </p> <p> <b>Example A.</b> A user is about to write his resume, and wants to use XML. He goes to a registry and looks in a subject hierarchy (or taxonomy) to find a resume DTD (this is browsing, not searching). The subject hierarchy interface displays three appropriate listings, he chooses among them on the basis of their descriptions, downloads the DTD he chose from the repository, manually adds it to his SO catalog, and sets to work with vi and SP. </p> <p> <b>Example B.</b> A user is about to write his resume, and wants to use XML. He goes to a registry and uses its search engine to find a resume DTD (this is searching, not browsing). The search interface returns three hits, he chooses among them on the basis of their descriptions, downloads from the repository the DTD he chose, and loads it into his XML writing tool. The interface also provides a time-to-live value, showing him how long he can expect his resume DTD to be served by the repository. </p> <p> <b>Example C.</b> A homeowner is about to advertise his house for sale, and opens his verboprocessor. He says "take a memo: real estate for sale" and the verboprocessor automatically contacts a registry to find an appropriate XML DTD (there is one already for real estate listings). He dictates the text of his ad without knowing anything about XML, and the verboprocessor sends it to all real estate listing services it can locate. (In this scenario the verboprocessor uses a registry to find something in a repository.) </p> <p> <b>Example D.</b> An XML application designer needs a component to represent the list of names of French provinces, so he consults a registry. The registry interface indicates that the list is available as a tab-delimited list in ASCII, as an XML schema datatype declaration, and as a parameter entity declaration in DTD syntax. He chooses the parameter entity declaration format by clicking something in the interface, and the repository returns it. </p> <p> <b>NOTE:</b> while it does not seem too useful at this stage, attention should be paid to SC32 WG2's 1999-04-20 draft “Metadata Query Service: An Object Technology Extension to the ISO/IEC 11179 Specification and Standardization of Data Elements, Part 3, Basic Attributes”, which has both use cases and IDL for “behavioral aspects of a data registry” (p. v). </p> <p> <b>NOTE:</b> There are additional scenarios in ISO/IEC 11179. </p> <p> </p> <p><a href="index.html">Back to OASIS Member's-Only Registry and Repository Technical Committee Home Page</a></p> </body> </html>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC