OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

cmis message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: Comments on CMIS link relations


Hi, Mark,

Thank you for your helpful comments. The CMIS TC does intend to seek
AtomPub link relation registration in the near future. Please keep us
informed about the new registration process.

Separately, the TC can use some assistance in refining the CMIS AtomPub
binding. In the upcoming weeks, members of the CMIS TC may seek help
from the AtomPub community on specific design questions. I hope you and
the AtomPub community can point us in the right direction.
The CMIS draft spec is publicly accessible (as well as almost all other
TC working materials).
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/32171
Any comment will be much appreciated.

Regards,
David

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net] 
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 9:58 PM
To: cmis-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: Atom-Syntax Syntax
Subject: [cmis-comment] Comments on CMIS link relations

[ CC:ing atom-syntax FYI ]

CMIS
<http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/32171/Draft%2061.zip 
 > specifies a large number of new link relations for use in Atom. A  
few comments and questions follow:

1. Each one of the link relations specifies a type of document that it  
references (with "Mime/Type", although I note that the proper term is  
media type, and the values given are prose descriptions, not media  
types). Is the intent here to limit these relations to those types? If  
so, this is conflating the job of a link relation with a media type.  
Link relation types should not be specific to any single format.

2. Some of the proposed registrations seem to overlap with existing  
relation types (e.g., "parents" whereas "up" has already been  
registered; "repository" where "service" would probably do.).

3. Other proposed registrations seem to be very specific to your use  
case (e.g., "streams", "allowableactions"). These cases may be better  
served by using extension relations (i.e., URIs).

4. Of the remaining ones, it does seem like there are some useful  
things to register (e.g., "child", "latestversion"), but the language  
shouldn't be specific to your use case; they need to be generic.

5. In case you're not aware, there's a proposal circulating to revise  
the link relation registration process, as well as provide a framework  
for them; see
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/draft-nottingham-http-link-header/ 
 >.

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/


-- 
This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
OASIS Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) TC.

In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
before posting.

Subscribe: cmis-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
Unsubscribe: cmis-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
List help: cmis-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cmis-comment/
Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
Committee:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=cmis




[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]