[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [chairs] Unique OASIS document identifiers
Just FYI, I probably won't be posting/responding much until December 2 because I've got other things on my plate till then, so you shouldn't construe my silence as anything significant. A couple of teaser responses below: Jeff Hodges wrote: > I think the above is kinda mixing some things together, such as notions of > maturity level and doc track. > > The way I'd do it is like this.. > > draft -- for proposals and working drafts and committee drafts. I > don't think we really need the fine distinction between them. > > this designation is used in conjunction with the next "term" in > the filename, which is either an individual's name, or an > acronym representing a committee. Often, "proposals" will be > from individuals... This seems fine to me ("wd" is a little shorter and is reminiscent of W3C specs, but I suppose it does result in less pronounceable filenames). > cs -- committee spec > > oasis -- oasis standard I like this too, and it's better than "os", which could be confusing. > so the above two doc types (indiv proposer, vs a committee working draft) would > be.. > > draft-{name_of_proposer}-{description}-nn > > ..or.. > > draft-{name_of_TC}-{description}-nn > > > The only "official" output of a committee is (to me) a "committee > specification" maturity-level doc. Now, that doc may or may not be "standards > track", ie it might be what you're thinking of tagging as "info" (aside: I'd > merge the notions of "info" and "white paper"). (Actually, just in case people are confused by this... I removed "info" from the proposal I sent to the chairs list; Jeff and I did a round or two before I sent it out more widely.) > we may or may not want to denote the doc track in the filename, I'm conflicted > on this. It's clear that some groups are producing informational documents already, so I think we need to address this. I used "wp-xxxxxx" for a white paper I wrote in the UBL TC, for example. And it sounds like Bill Pope needs this too. >> Vnn >> Is a representation of the version of the Standard, however the >> TC wants to reflect that. > > couple of things here. I'd start the filename of an oasis std with "oasis". I > wouldn't put the committee name in the filename cuz in an efficient the docs > will last longer than the committee. Plus I wouldn't have a Vnn version > designator in the filename. I'd have an oasis-wide monotonically increasing doc > number. the info about whether a spec is updated or obsoleted (and doc track > and maturity level) is maintained in the document index (which might just be > output from a spreadsheet for the time being). > > this gives something like.. > > oasis-####-{description} > > where #### is the oasis doc number. > > > examples.. > > oasis-0011-docbook-whatever > oasis-0029-saml-core > oasis-0030-saml-bindings This will hinge on whether OASIS/Karl is willing to be the owner of the number assignment. I can't imagine that this is a gargantuan task, but it's not currently on their plate, so we need to check. (I don't mind the unique number thing; IETF uses it, JCP uses it, and others do as well.) Eve -- Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 Sun Microsystems cell +1 781 354 9441 Web Technologies and Standards eve.maler @ sun.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC