[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [obix] Groups - obix-v1.1-wd19.pdf uploaded
|
All- I’ve made the watch changes (#1 below) to WD20, which I can post later today. I’ve also made the corresponding changes to stdlib.obix, in case that is still important, or if the schema author wants to use it. Will post along with WD20. My question is about #5. I see 1.1 as standing alone, because the references to the REST, SOAP, and Encodings docs are non-normative. It seems to make the
document more understandable to have these references in place, because it helps motivate the rules, and to give the reader a better sense of the “big picture”. Are we sure we’d like to remove them? If I can get feedback on that soon, I’d prefer to make the changes then post in WD20. If I don’t hear anything I’ll just post it as is. Thanks Craig From: Toby Considine [mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com]
On Behalf Of Toby Considine OK, thanks. So much for reviews on a phone… Before next PR, we need: 1.1 1)
Watch changes a indicated by Craig 2)
Changes to Schema to support (1) 3)
Additions to Schema to replace role of STDLIB.
4)
Do we need UML to represent the LOBBY additions? STDLIB? Including this might improve document clarity. 5)
OBIX Encodings, OBIX REST and OBIX SOAP should be removed from the non-normative references. Alternately, OBIX Web Sockets should be added. My concern
here is that 1.1 should stand alone with no “circular’ references, Encodings: 6)
For each encoding section, the mimetype used must be declared as described in Declarations of Binding type as described in 5.4.2. I.e., for each encoding,
there should be a section that states “The mime type for this encoding is xxx”. Binding SOAP 7)
There should be a section that indicates binding as described in section 5.4.3, i.e., the name “SOAP”, and the displayName “soapBinding”. The val,
of course, is the current version of the document. 8)
Are any WSDL changes to support the Lobby changes? Binding REST 9)
There should be a section that indicates binding as described in section 5.4.3, i.e., the name “REST”, and the displayName “restBinding”. The val,
of course, is the current version of the document. Binding WebSockets 10)
There should be a section that indicates binding as described in section 5.4.3, i.e., the name “WS” (or other), and the displayName “webSockets”.
The val, of course, is the current version of the document. 11)
Once (1) is complete, the portions that describe the watch should be reviewed, and probably removed, to avoid potential redefinition and/or conflict
with the core specification. Any other issues remaining? I am 13 timezones away from my normal one this week, and may not be able to make the meeting, but I will try. I have a new-found respect for those who have
participated from Asia. tc "If something is not worth doing, it`s not worth doing well " -- Peter Drucker
From: Gemmill, Craig [mailto:craig.gemmill@tridium.com]
Toby-
I don’t have the watch changes needed by websockets (unsolicitedBufferDelay, maxBufferedEvents, etc.) in the core for WD19, just the description tweaks that
we discussed in the last TC meeting. I think the plan was to move these into the core, which I can try to get in before this week’s meeting. Craig From:
obix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:obix@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Considine, Toby This looks pretty good. I think we are getting there. I recommend that members review this as if it is a candidate for Public Review. Matthias: With the watch information now in the core, can we abbreviate that watch in Web Sockets to avoid re-statement? tc "When one door closes, another opens; but we often look so long and so regretfully upon the closed door that we do not see the one which has opened for us."
-- Alexander Graham Bell
From:
obix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:obix@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Craig Gemmill Submitter's message
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]