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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

obix message

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

Subject: RE: [obix] OBIX Deadline today - unresolved issues

Comments inline.


From: William Cox [mailto:wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 8:09 PM
To: Obix TC List
Cc: ludob@horizontec.com; Gemmill, Craig; Toby Considine
Subject: Re: [obix] OBIX Deadline today - unresolved issues



My emails on 21 October discussed issues remaining with the schema and the spec, and came out of a detailed phone call with Toby.

BTW Toby had a hardware failure of some kind Tuesday, and I've not heard from him since.

These issues are still open, and affect both the specification (1.1) and the schema. I've seen nothing on the list regarding this; perhaps I should be more inflammatory to get comments. ;-)

The issues are

  • The Integral types and inconsistentcy between spec and schema (21 Oct, 5:20pm ET) with diagrams

The Schema is the final word once we’ve released it; however, the spec is the correct value for what we want.  It should be a 64-bit long.  So I think the schema should be changed to represent that.

  • Obj is the complexType, but the spec says "Object" everywhere.

Obj is just the abbreviated notation of “Object”, because it is less jarring to the reader to see the known word Object, instead of the non-word Obj, in the prose.  The XML representation is ‘obj’, which is just an abbreviation to save space, since it’s used frequently.  If you want to change the schema to say ‘Object’ instead of ‘Obj’, that’s fine, but the XML representation should stay ‘obj’, and the spec should stay “Object” for readability.  If a sentence is needed somewhere up in Section 3 or 4 to say that “Object” == <obj>, that’s fine.

  • Minor issue on cardinality of "is" attrribute to "Obj"

is = 0 .. N,   not 0 .. 1

  • Updated UML to reflect the xs:any (separate email just sent)


  • Annotate the xs:any use in the specification.

You mean in Section 4 or something?

Ludo --

Which specific items are not in synch?

I think that the spec should say something about each substantive thing expressed in the schema .



William Cox 

Email: wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com 

Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com 

+1 862 485 3696 mobile


On 10/22/14 9:27 AM, Ludo Bertsch wrote:

As a final check, I did some quick comparisons of the Schema and the text, and found they did not agree; and thus prompted my comments last week.  It looks like Bill and you folks are in the midst of solving the issues.  Since the Schema has the ultimate priority, we need to make sure that the Schema is right.

Question: does every term in the Schema need to have an explanation in the text?  For example, "int" has "unit" in the Schema, but the text does not mention that?  What does "unit" mean for "int"? 


On 10/21/2014 6:29 PM, Gemmill, Craig wrote:



I didn’t see any questions from you, although there seems to be some from either Ludo or Bill.


I don’t think any of these require changes to the spec.  I will address what questions I see here, please let me know if I’m missing something:

·         The obix:int type defined in maps to an xs:long.  The schema and the figure both need to reflect this.

·         The root abstraction is “Object”.  This is abbreviated in encoding as “obj”.  I’m not sure how the text on 324-325 is incorrect, because it uses the term Object consistently.  An Object can implement zero or more Contracts (not just zero or one).  Assuming the request was to make line 344 (and not 324) singular, I disagree.  An Object must be allowed to implement any number of Contracts.  What about an alarmable sensor point, that must implement obix:Point obix:Alarm obix:StatefulAlarm?

·         A contract is NOT just an alias for anyURI, I don’t think.  Maybe only in the XSD, although I’m not sure I agree with even that restricted statement.  I’m not a schema guru, so I could be wrong, it just seems like an oversimplification to me.


So, these are the only questions I’ve seen, and I don’t see any changes necessary yet to WD36.  If you think we need something new, let me know, or if there is a new XSD we can include that.





From: Toby Considine [mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Toby Considine
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 1:15 PM
To: Gemmill, Craig
Subject: RE: [obix] OBIX Deadline today


Did you see my ?s on Schema?




"There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems "

-- Ed Crowley

Toby Considine
TC9, Inc

OASIS TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar

OASIS TC Editor: EMIX, Energy Interoperation

SGIP Smart Grid Architecture Committee


Email: Toby.Considine@gmail.com
Phone: (919)619-2104

blog: http://www.NewDaedalus.com


From: Gemmill, Craig [mailto:craig.gemmill@tridium.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 1:02 PM
To: Toby Considine
Subject: RE: [obix] OBIX Deadline today


Is there anything to do?  I have not seen any comments from anyone that would require any further effort.  Let me know if you need me to provide something else before the vote.  I’m in meetings all day today, tomorrow, and Thursday (although I plan to try and step out for the TC meeting).



From: obix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:obix@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Toby Considine
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 10:15 AM
To: obix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [obix] OBIX Deadline today


Remember that we need complete packages for all OBIX specifications today.


A complete package is a Zip archive including:


1)      Editable form

2)      Normative form (PDF w/ Line Numbers)

3)      Any Artifacts (XSD, WSDL as appropriate or needed)


We vote on the entire archive.


We also need to prepare a document showing differences between this version and the one used for the last Public Review. Drop me a line if you need assistance preparing this.


We also need an issue resolution report (from Jira) for all issues. If you have any Jira issues make sure that they are up-to-date. If you must prioritize, I’d rather get the packages today, and Jira updated tomorrow. I can then prepare resolution reports from Jira.


We hope to vote the complete set out for public review this week, then turn to the white paper.




"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it."

- Brian W. Kernighan

Toby Considine
TC9, Inc

OASIS TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar

OASIS TC Editor: EMIX, Energy Interoperation

SGIP Smart Grid Architecture Committee


Email: Toby.Considine@gmail.com
Phone: (919)619-2104

blog: http://www.NewDaedalus.com


Ludo Bertsch, P.Eng.
Horizon Technologies
(250) 592-1488
This email may contain confidential information and is directed at the
recipient only and is not to be disclosed to anyone else without
permission.  If you have received this email in error, please
inform us and delete this email and attachments. Please let us
know if you no longer wish to receive emails from us.               


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