[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [chairs] Oasis document identifiers - conclusion!
Ironic, I recently switched to hyphens from underscores because the former
is more widely acceptable in URLs (for example, hyphens are legal in DNS
names.) It's also easier to tell they are there when the address is turned
into a hyperlink - frequently underscores are obscured by the hyperlink
underline.
But I can live with either too.
=Drummond
-----Original Message-----
From: Eddie O'Brien [mailto:eddie@ringtailsolutions.com]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 7:23 AM
To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [chairs] Oasis document identifiers - conclusion!
I've been following the conversation and my only preference would be a
programmatic preference:
oasis_####_odrxml_blah_1.0.html
rather than....
oasis-####-odrxml-blah-1.0.html
People who write code for living will understand the point, I also think its
more visually legible, but I can live with either.
Regards
Eddie O'Brien
-----Original Message-----
From: jkeane [mailto:jik@jkeane.com]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:12 AM
To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [chairs] Oasis document identifiers - conclusion!
Can any NOT live with this approach to document identifiers?
James I. Keane
OdrXML, LegalXML Steering Committee
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Greenwood [mailto:dang@mit.edu]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:52 PM
To: Philpott, Robert; chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [chairs] Oasis document identifiers - conclusion!
Ah, yes, that is right - I went too fast - thanks for catching that.
Then would the final proposal be as follows:
OASIS Standard stage:
oasis-####-odrxml-blah-1.0.html
oasis-####-odrxml-blah-1.0.pdf
Committee Spec stage:
odrxml-blah-1.0-cs.html
odrxml-blah-1.0-cs.pdf
odrxml-lala-1.0-cs.html
odrxml-lala-1.0-cs.pdf
Working Drafts stage:
odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-03.html
odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-03-diff.html
odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-02.html
odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-02-diff.html
odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-01.html
odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-03.html
odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-03-diff.html
odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-02.html
odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-02-diff.html
odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-01.html
OASIS TC Formation stage:
odrxml-charter-1.0.html
Thanks,
- Dan, eContracts TC
==============================================
| Daniel J. Greenwood, Esq.
| Director, E-Commerce Architecture Program
| MIT School of Architecture and Planning
| 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Room 7-231
| Cambridge, MA 02139
| http://ecitizen.mit.edu
| or http://www.civics.com
| dang@mit.edu
==============================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Philpott, Robert [mailto:rphilpott@rsasecurity.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:33 PM
To: 'dang@mit.edu'; 'chairs@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: RE: [chairs] Oasis document identifiers - conclusion!
Dan - I think you missed a nuance of Eve's recommendation. You also did not
factor in the OASIS-approved document number in your examples. Was that
intentional? which has been discussed on the list. Eve did not include a
"-os" for oasis-approved standard. For those docs, the oasis-approved
document ID gets prepended to the file name with an "oasis-" label.
> OASIS Standard stage:
> oasis-####-odrxml-charter-1.0.doc
> oasis-####-odrxml-charter-1.0.pdf
I actually prefer this over the "-os" suggestion since it makes a clear
distinction between draft or cs specs and final approved standards. Also,
"os" and "cs" look a bit too much alike and may cause confusion.
Rob Philpott
RSA Security Inc.
The Most Trusted Name in e-Security
Tel: 781-515-7115
Mobile: 617-510-0893
Fax: 781-515-7020
mailto:rphilpott@rsasecurity.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Greenwood [mailto:dang@mit.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:24 PM
> To: Eve L. Maler; chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [chairs] Oasis document identifiers - conclusion!
>
> I am also in complete agreement with Eve's proposal.
>
> Just to be sure we're all on the same page, and the proposal is
> complete, I have assumed that this naming scheme is intended to
> include final Oasis Standards (which I further assume should be
> denoted as "os"). I scratched out a fuller example below (primarily
> to illustrate to my own satisfaction how this would actually play
> out), which I share to see if it is correct.
>
> I have further assumed that there would be no "-diff" designations
for
> official Oasis Standards or Technical Committee Specifications -
> because they are in fact "final" stand alone documents. But I have
> applied the "-diff" suffix to draft documents (including draft
> spec/standards), different where versions of the same document must
be
> dealt with, and a "red-lined" version to show changes is helpful.
>
> Along the same lines, I don't understand the need for any additional
> trailing version information after a "cs" or "os" document, as those
> designations mean the document has already been voted upon by OASIS
or
> agreed upon by the TC and is final in THAT form. A later final
> official version of an earlier final official standard or
> specification would be, I presume, "2.0" rather than "1.0". So, I
> have removed the additional versioning information from the "os" and
> "cs" documents. Is this not correct?
>
> I've played out the naming scheme with two official documents:
"blah"
> and "lala". Blah goes on "all the way" to become an OASIS Standard
> (os), while the "lala" document plateaus as a Technical Committee
> Specification (cs). There are drafts of both "blah" and "lala". Since
> there is, technically, no TC before a final charter exists, I have not
> bothered to apply a version chain to earlier drafts of a charter
> document (though individuals forming a TC certainly may wish to use
> the same convention) and I have called that phase the "TC Formation
> stage" rather than "standard stage" to be clearer about
what
> has actually happened. After the TC is formed, then the standards
> creation work begins during the "wording drafts" phase.
>
> OASIS Standard stage:
> odrxml-blah-1.0-os.html
> odrxml-blah-1.0-os.pdf
> Committee Spec stage:
> odrxml-blah-1.0-cs.html
> odrxml-blah-1.0-cs.pdf
> odrxml-lala-1.0-cs.html
> odrxml-lala-1.0-cs.pdf
> Working drafts:
> odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-03.html
> odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-03-diff.html
> odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-02.html
> odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-02-diff.html
> odrxml-blah-1.0-draft-01.html
> odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-03.html
> odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-03-diff.html
> odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-02.html
> odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-02-diff.html
> odrxml-lala-1.0-draft-01.html
> OASIS TC formation stage:
> odrxml-charter-1.0.html
>
> A final note - I believe it is very important that any final
agreement
> on semantic naming schemes include the "cs" phase as a separate
> designation, and not simply the "draft" or "os" phases.
>
> I wonder: is the above "blah" and "lala" example a correct (or at
> least acceptable) extrapolation of how the proposal would be
applied?
>
> Thanks,
> - Dan Greenwood, Chair of the eContracts TC
>
> ==============================================
> | Daniel J. Greenwood, Esq.
> | Director, E-Commerce Architecture Program
> | MIT School of Architecture and Planning
> | 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Room 7-231
> | Cambridge, MA 02139
> | http://ecitizen.mit.edu
> | or http://www.civics.com
> | dang@mit.edu
> ==============================================
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:eve.maler@sun.com]
> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 10:34 PM
> To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [chairs] Oasis document identifiers - conclusion?
>
> I'm sure the Kavi system will be wonderful and I agree that having
> proper metadata is the right thing to do, but it very much appeals
to
> me
> to have a filenaming convention that works even when all you have is
> text editors, file directories, and browsers, with no cool
> registry/repository in the middle. The web earned its success by
> working even in "roughing-it" circumstances, and I think we'll
benefit
> by continuing to account for them.
>
> jkeane wrote:
> > 1) Have a meaningful name - no acronyms or abbreviations for
> contents.
> > Short TC names do makes sense. I keep an archive of work
products,
> pruning
> > out unnecessary documents and most drafts after the project is
long
> over.
> > When you are browsing an older directory the Alzheimer effect
kicks
> in after
> > six months.
>
> Certainly it makes sense to avoid being cryptic. However, I notice
> that the current OASIS web server seems to truncate long filenames
> when doing
> a directory display, losing critical information unless you hover
over
> the link and observe the full link name in the browser footer bar. Can
> this truncation be fixed?
>
> > 2) We store related documents in project sub-directories. This
> makes it
> > unnecessary to include extensive generic info in every file name.
> If you
> > store all the docs in a single directory, it would make more sense
> to have
> > the prime sort by TC name.
>
> I was thinking that all the filenames of all the TC outputs should
be
> distinguishable and unique even if they were put into one big pile.
> Thus, the TC ID should always appear in the filename because it
serves
> as a "namespace" that disambiguates otherwise-similar filenames from
> different groups. Project subdirectories are great if called for,
but
> I'd think it would still be desirable to reflect those categories in
> their filenames.
>
> >
> > 3) Include the date (as proposed, but in a sortable format) File
> dates
> > change (i.e. moving all files from computer A to computer B for
> maintenance.
>
> Yikes, I really hate putting publication dates in filenames. W3C
does
> that, and it's a really unwieldy and hard-to-mentally-sort device.
In
> the SAML group, we've just been using the trick of publishing 00,
01,
> 02, 03, etc. drafts, and I've been advocating it here because it has
> worked incredibly well. That way, implementors can say "Our latest
> download conforms to draft 31, but we're prepared to change it to
> reflect the draft-34 changes by next Wednesday." And in a meeting
you
> can say "I move to accept draft 07 of this document as a Committee
> Spec." The constantly increasing draft number gives more
information
> at
> a glance than does the (frankly random) date on which publication
> occurred, and is way shorter.
>
> > 4) Include version sequence in sortable format. This will avoid
> confusion
> > about which drafts are on the table.
>
> Agree. Though so far we've been discussing allowing the
{description}
> field to be anything the TC wants, so one way to go is to make
> recommendations (SHOULDs) about this, and another is to make fast
> rules
> (MUSTs) about it.
>
> > 5) Add any relevant trailing info about status or special
features.
>
> Sure.
>
> > Here is an example of what we used in drafting the Online Dispute
> Resolution
> > Charter. This approach has enabled me to work with ad hoc teams
over
> many
> > projects over many years and not have too much confusion or
spending
> time in
> > discussions (which we needed do here) like this.
> >
> > OdrXML Charter 1.0 DRAFT 2002.09.26.doc
> > OdrXML Charter 1.1 DRAFT 2002.10.07.doc
> > OdrXML Charter 1.2 DRAFT FINAL 2002.10.18.doc
> > OdrXML Charter 1.2 DRAFT FINAL REDLINE 2002.10.18.doc OdrXML Charter
> > 1.2a DRAFT FINAL 2002.10.19.doc OdrXML Charter FINAL 2002.11.11.doc
>
> Exposing my weirdnesses once again, I have an allergy to spaces in
> filenames. Most systems and software handle them now, but a few old
> ones don't handle them so well.
>
> I do agree with your ordering of the fields, though.
>
> My preferences (including lowercase spelling :-) mapped onto your
> ordering would look (very) approximately like this:
>
> Working drafts:
> odrxml-charter-1.0-draft-01.doc
> odrxml-charter-1.0-draft-02.doc
> odrxml-charter-1.0-draft-03.doc
> Committee Spec stage:
> odrxml-charter-1.0-cs-01.doc
> odrxml-charter-1.0-cs-01-diff.doc
> odrxml-charter-1.0-cs-01.pdf
> OASIS Standard stage:
> oasis-####-odrxml-charter-1.0.doc
> oasis-####-odrxml-charter-1.0.pdf
>
> I would like to come to closure on this matter really soon because I
> don't have a lot more cycles to spend on it, but the problem is that
> we don't have a clearly defined decision-making authority responsible
for
> this -- unless it's Karl?...
>
> Eve
>
> --
> Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190
> Sun Microsystems cell +1 781 354 9441
> Web Technologies and Standards eve.maler @ sun.com
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC