RE: [provision] One or many data models?

["Sandy Walsh" <sandy.walsh@abridean.com>]

Hey all!

Good discussion! I've finally come up for air from our last release to start
getting involved :-) hi!

While there are good arguments being presented for keeping the SPML 1.0
schema in 2.0, we have to ask ourselves if we want to carry this baggage
forward forever. I agree with the general sentiment of dropping the 1.0
schema data.

Schema is a well-solved problem via XML-Schema (and others) and, as a group,
we should be focused on provisioning use-cases and not yet another schema
language. For that reason, I think that XML-Schema (or some pluggable
definition) should be our strategy going forward. If you look at the bulk of
the SPML 1.0 specification, more than 50% of it is related to schema
definition. By refactoring this out of the spec, SPML would become much
lighter and therefore gain greater acceptance by being easier to adopt. 

As a side note, there are other schema-related issues we should consider
*around* provisioning such as attribute grouping. Attribute grouping would
provide hints to the presentation layer on how to organize attributes. So,
if you have hundreds of attributes that may be available in the presentation
layer, the schema can provide hints as to how to logically group them.
Personally, I'd be more interested in seeing that in the SPML spec. 

Just a couple of thoughts. 

Cheers!

Sandy Walsh
Abridean, Inc.


-----Original Message-----
From: Darran Rolls [mailto:Darran.Rolls@waveset.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 1:18 AM
To: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [provision] One or many data models?


As discussed, the committee has to decide on the data model for the 2.0
specification.  On the one hand, as prototyped by Jeff Bohren at the last
F2F meeting, we can devise a solution that keeps the 1.0 DSML data model by
adding an extensible schema "root" that allowed for its coexistence with a
new "XML Schema" data model.  The "cost" of this model is increased
complexity.  On the other hand we can take a single data model solution as
proposed by Gerry Woods at the F2F and base 2.0 on a pure XML Schema data
model at the "expense" of 1.0/ 2.0 compatibility and backwards support for
1.0 in a 2.0 compliant service.
Please consider this issue and ask questions/state preferences now.  I
propose we hold a ballot on this issue around the next committee con-call
3/16/04.
Thanks
Darran


--
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 7.0.225 / Virus Database: 262.1.3 - Release Date: 3/3/2004

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>