[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [chairs] What can Standards Development / TC Administration doto help?
> > Aren't namespaces supposed to be opaque? So unless they are excessively > long or practically painful in some other way, the TCs shouldn't care > much about their composition, I think. I think it's sometimes difficult to know how to apply the "opaque" rule, if one believes in it strongly. Some TCs care about NS URI composition because it's (arguably, in their design considerations) interactive with namespace versioning policy, where a versioning component may be incorporated as a substring in the URI string. I think that decision should be left to TCs (not mandated by OASIS Staff). Another consideration relates to the choice of NS URI type when selecting an HTTP scheme URI: (final string char) slash, slashless, or hash. There are cogent arguments for selecting one of these three as opposed to one of the other two. And yes, the discussion becomes religious, but I support a TC's right to incorporate their choice into specification design (e.g., QNames appended to final "/" in a NS URI, for concatenation to generate derivative names in the space (named properties, functions, dialects, faults, actions, other message types as non-information resources). Some of the current design principles for OASIS (HTTP scheme) NS URIs was taken from W3C formulations, but admittedly, dicussions in the W3C TAG have moved the conversation forward. Discussion (and rules) here: OASIS Naming Guidelines "XML Namespace Design, Allocation, and Management" http://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/namingGuidelines/resourceNamingV08.html#NamespaceDesign "URIs for W3C Namespaces" http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri "Associating Resources with Namespaces http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/nsDocuments/ "The Disposition of Names in an XML Namespace" http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-namespaceState-20060329/ > > As far as their uniqueness goes, I think this can be better managed by > the authority who owns the domain name (typical component of namespace > design) and has the overall administrative supervision over the various > groups wanting to have their own namespaces. The uniqueness requirement is already incorporated into the Naming Guidelines document: [quote] URIs intended for use as HTTP scheme URI namespace names should be formally identified by the TC (as early in the specification design process as possible) so that the OASIS TC Administration may check for possible naming collisions, approve the proposed resolution target resource [namespace document], and properly reserve the URI -- including possibly reservation of (all) space below the hierarchical level of the candidate NS URI [/] > > Basically, Martin's suggestion to have TC's request and get a namespace > from the OASIS staff makes sense to me. A compromise might be to suggest that Staff work with TCs in understanding various design considerations that might be relevant in that particular TC's specifications (namespace architecture) - Robin Robin Cover OASIS, Director of Information Services Editor, Cover Pages and XML Daily Newslink Email: email@example.com Staff bio: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/staff.php#cover Cover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/ Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletterArchive.html Tel: +1 972-296-1783 > > Best wishes, > Sanjay > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Freund [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] > Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 8:29 AM > To: Martin Chapman > Cc: Mary McRae; email@example.com > Subject: Re: [chairs] What can Standards Development / TC Administration > do to help? > > Dosen't that just put the show on the other foot? > What if the TC does not like the looks of the allocated namespace which > might be some random string? > > On Apr 22, 2010, at 11:07 AM, Martin Chapman wrote: > >> How about having a service whereby TCs can request the allocation of a > namespace, rather than making one up and falling foul of the hard to > interpret guidelines. This could also be accompanied with a partially > filled out rddl document that points to the right places. >> >> Martin. >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mary McRae [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] >>> Sent: 21 April 2010 20:27 >>> To: email@example.com >>> Subject: [chairs] What can Standards Development / TC Administration > do to help? >>> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> If you've submitted a specification for public review or CS ballot > recently, you've probably met >>> Kim. I'm thrilled to have her on board and hopefully we're now in > good shape to get your documents >>> turned around quickly once again. >>> >>> That said, I have at least a dozen ideas of services we can once > again offer, or new services, to >>> make your lives a bit easier, but I thought I would ask you for your > ideas rather than deciding for >>> you. There are some caveats of course: >>> >>> a. Neither Kim nor I have the power or the skillset to change > anything about the way Kavi works. >>> b. We're not talking about changes to the TC Process. >>> >>> So, for instance: >>> >>> - Would you find a template for recording meeting minutes helpful? If > yes, in what flavors? >>> >>> - Would you like us to take over creation of spec covers? (as in > you'll use a temporary cover which >>> would become part of the template, you would provide us with whatever > information necessary, and we >>> would create the cover pages with all the appropriate links and make > sure they work before uploading >>> to docs.oasis-open.org?) >>> >>> - Would you like us to review your specifications prior to TC ballots > so you don't need to go back and >>> fix stuff afterwards? >>> >>> - Would you like us to call in to TC meetings periodically just to > hear our voices and answer any >>> questions you might have? >>> >>> - Would you like more training materials? If yes, is there a > particular topic you'd like to see >>> covered? >>> >>> Remember these are just some of *my* ideas; I want to hear *your* > ideas. I need to know what your TOP >>> request is; you can have more than one, but please list in order of > priority. While you're free to >>> discuss on this list, please send your actual list to me so I can > track them. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Mary >>> >>> Mary P McRae >>> Director, Standards Development >>> Technical Committee Administrator >>> OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society >>> email: firstname.lastname@example.org >>> web: www.oasis-open.org >>> twitter: @fiberartisan #oasisopen >>> phone: 1.603.232.9090 >>> >>> Standards are like parachutes: they work best when they're open. >>> >>> >>> > >