Spec draft 6.

[Gary P Cole <Gary.P.Cole@Sun.COM>]

Changes in Draft 6 (attached):
- Use ‘http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath20’; as namespaceURI for Xpath.
- Illustrate targetId as an attribute (with additions and strikethroughs).
- Remove namespace qualifier from status values (e.g., “success”).
- Correct miscellaneous errors in examples (noted by Rami Elron).
- Assume top-level elements bulkModifyResponse and bulkDeleteResponse
of type spml:ResponseType.
- Assume top-level element iterateResponse of type SearchResponseType.

Also attached:
- updated draft_15_xsd_issues.txt
- updated spec_issues_20050405.txt

draft_pstc_spmlv2_d06.doc

|----------------------------
|Follow up on Draft 11
|----------------------------
|
|51. 	When SchemaType#ref is a location (URL to a schema document),
|	is this an alternative to including the schema document 
|	as content of the <schema> element?
|	Would it be clearer to have separate attributes (as we do for CapabilityType):
|      - one that identifies the schema ('namespaceURI') and
|      - another that gives the location of a schema document ('location')?
|Draft 14 - OPEN.  SchemaType#ref is unchanged.
|20050328 - Wait and see whether anyone besides Jeff and me cares.
|20050401 - Documented con-call decision in listTargetsResponse (spec d05).
|

 65.	SchemaEntityRefType needs optional #targetID.
      Reference definition in target 1 to refer to an entity on target 2.
  

| 66.	SchemaEntityRefType#canReferTo should be minOccurs="1" (not "0").
|20050328 - Omitting <canReferTo> means canReferTo any SE on any target.
|20030329 - Fixed in spec.
|

 67.  Make "targetID" an attribute (rather than an element).
20050329 - Asked Jeff Bohren: he's okay with it.
20050329 - Sent email to list: "Make targetID an attribute."
20050405 - Illustrated with additions and strikethroughs in main spec.

68.  Add top-level elements bulkModifyResponse and bulkDeleteResponse
     of type spml:ResponseType.  Allows for matching request/response pairs.
20050405 - Sent email: "Request/response element pairs."
20050405 - Jeff Bohren said the thought this was okay.

69.  Add top-level element spmlsearch:iterateResponse of type SearchResponseType?
20050405 - Jeff Bohren says we should (be logically consistent about this).
1. Darran will send UML diagram(s) to replace ERD (in section 2.1).
20050215 - Darran Rolls has taken this action item (originally Gerry's).


|2. What is the 'namespaceURI' value for an XPath expression? (throughout)
|20050325 - Overlap?
|20050329 - Still need to know this for examples.
|20050331 - Sent email to PSTC: "What is the namespaceURI value for XPath?"
|20050404 - (d06) Martin Raepple suggested "http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath20";.
|

3. What is the 'namespaceURI' value for a SPML1.0 (DSMLv2) attribute expression?
20050325 - Overlap?
20050329 - Still may want to mention this as an example in the main spec.
20050331 - SPMLv2 DSML Profile doc should specify this.


4. Search on references.
		A requestor can query for Person instances based on “owner” 
      	only if the provider defines “owner” as an element or attribute of Person 
              in the schema for the target.  In such a case, what would the value of “owner” look like? 
              Would “owner=’joebob’ work?
20050329 - Discussed in con-call.  
           - Jeff said to say only what we do (not what we don't do).
           - Hal said to say we don't if people will assume that we do.
           - Compromise: ability to search on references is unspecified.
20050329 - Jeff Bohren suggested that maybe we *could* search on references.  I said I'd help.


5. Should Custom Capabilities point to a "registry" of custom capabilities.
20050222 - Darran suggested that the PSTC should maintain such a registry.


6. Update "Security and privacy considerations".
20050215 - Darran says that we should update this.  Wants a volunteer.
20050222 - Hal Lockhart volunteered to update this. Keep this in the spec.
20050329 - Hal thinks he can do this during this week.


7. Appendix I (throughout): Document references need validation and update.
20050329 - Raj volunteered during the con-call to do this.

8. Appendix L: Glossary.  Definitions need review and update.
20050222 - Point to a separate document for Glossary.
20050329 - Raj volunteered during the con-call to do this.

9. Jeff Bohren suggested text for "Conversational flow". 
20050405 - Jeff sent email: "Suggested text for version 3.1.1".
20050405 - I'd already removed the word "blocking".
           Overlooks the case where provider chooses asynchronous execution.

10. What if reference capability declaration contains no reference definition?
	[Ed. If the provider did not declare any typeOfReference within target2’s declaration 
	of the Reference Capability for Person, would this mean that an instance of Person on target2 
	may use any type of reference refer to an instance of any schema entity on any target?]

11. What if a reference definition does not specify a targetID on the canReferTo schema entity?
	[Ed. If the provider did not specify a targetID within “Person-owns-Account”, 
	would this be an error (since target2 does not support Account), or would this mean that 
	an instance of Person on target2 may use the “owns” type of reference refer to 
	an instance of Account on any target?]

12. Rami wants each request element to have a corresponding response element for clarity.
20050404 - We can do this without defining another type.  Sent email: "Request/response pairs."
20050405 - (d06) Illustrate the addition of a new top-level element bulkModifyResponse of type spml:ResponseType.