Standard Schema draft 4 - big issues.

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

I appreciate the review comments I've received from the PSTC.  (I have not yet responded to James Hu, but his comments are also excellent.) 

Unfortunately, I doubt that I will be able to call in to the PSTC con call on Tuesday.   I will be attending Java One conference.

Could we discuss on the alias some of the issues?  I think I 
can collect the issues and bring to the top some of the biggest ones.  
If we decide a few of the major issues, then many of the others may follow.  

For example, I feel that some of the biggest questions were: 

1) Should the Schema have operational attributes that duplicate 
standard capabilities?

NOTE: Jeff Bohren dislikes this, but operational attributes allow a single request to do much more than it otherwise could (e.g., create a Person in a disabled state or create an Account with a pre-expired password).


2) Should the Schema represent a subordinate entity (e.g., an address) as a complex attribute, or can we represent each as a sub-object?

NOTE: Martin Raepple and I favor the sub-object approach (which would represent Address as an object-class).  Does anyone strongly disagree?


3) Should the Schema include object-classes that make sense only to a provisioning system?

NOTE: Jeff Bohren says no, but I point out that SPML is a provisioning markup language.  Since object-classes are optional, a provider that does not wish to support them can simply omit them from its schema.