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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep-cc-review message

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


Subject: Re: [regrep-cc-review] Re: Methodology - OWL


Joseph:

I will come up with a work plan then we can determine if such is needed. 
 Will get back to you soon.

Duane

Chiusano Joseph wrote:

>Great - thanks Duane!
>
>Please let me know if at any point you need additional information
>beyond what is expressed on this listserv, regarding our Core Component
>storage representations. We may also want to consider whether or not it
>would be more efficient to have a separate listserv for serialization -
>I'm fine with either approach (same or separate listserv).
>
>Joe
>
>Duane Nickull wrote:
>  
>
>>I volunteer.
>>
>>Duane
>>
>>Chiusano Joseph wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>All,
>>>
>>>We discussed this topic (XML serialization of Core Components) on our
>>>last Registry TC call, and the consensus was:
>>>
>>>- It needs to be done
>>>- It should be done within the Registry TC
>>>- Furthermore, it should be done within the Core Components Review SC
>>>
>>>So at this point, we're looking for someone who would like to lead this
>>>work while I continue to drive forward with the storage representation.
>>>If anyone would like to volunteer, please let me know.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Joe
>>>
>>>Chiusano Joseph wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Here's an update on this for all (including serialization in our
>>>>efforts):
>>>>
>>>>I have run this by Kathryn, and we've decided to add it to the agenda of
>>>>our next Registry TC call. I'll send an update to the list after it's
>>>>discussed.
>>>>
>>>>Joe
>>>>
>>>>Duane Nickull wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Joseph:
>>>>>
>>>>>I would word the choices as this and call for a vote for #1 or #2:
>>>>>
>>>>>1. This group should take on the task of defining the serialization for
>>>>>Core Components and BIE's.  This will enable them to be used and
>>>>>retrieved from a registry or anywhere else.  This work will be done in
>>>>>addition to defining the storage format.  The group will sort out the
>>>>>details later of what dependencies may exist between these two tasks.
>>>>>
>>>>>or
>>>>>
>>>>>2.  This group will not be involved with defining a Core Component or
>>>>>BIE serialization.  There is no need for anyone to use CC's or BIE's or
>>>>>another group should be formed to tackle that responsibility.
>>>>>
>>>>>I propose that you, as chair of this group, call for a vote.  I do not
>>>>>see any benefit to define a serialization in absence of a storage format
>>>>>so saving and using the existing work is valid.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>>Duane Nickull
>>>>>
>>>>>Chiusano Joseph wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Excellent points - I think a vote would be best. However, I'm still not
>>>>>>certain about what is being proposed, and we probably shouldn't have a
>>>>>>vote until this is solidifed. Please let me know which of the 2 choices
>>>>>>you propose:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>(1) That we not define storage for CCs (undoes all of our work thus far)
>>>>>>(2) That we define storage for CCs, and additionally an XML
>>>>>>serialization
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>>Joe
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Duane Nickull wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Joseph:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>How about a negative opt-out response instead?  If anyone feels that
>>>>>>>this should NOT be done in our TC, they can express why to this list.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Can we assume the work if no one opposes it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Duane
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Chiusano Joseph wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thanks so much Duane. In terms of the SC, we still have not received any
>>>>>>>>feedback indicating any agreement whatsoever that we should include
>>>>>>>>serialization in our work. If anyone feels that we should, please
>>>>>>>>express this on our listserv. Unless there are responses, we can't have
>>>>>>>>a sense of what the SC believes is the best course of action.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>We also have not yet clarified whether or not the serialization would be
>>>>>>>>in place of the storage work we have done so far, or in addition to.
>>>>>>>>Let's also please clarify this point as well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Looking forward to your responses...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Joe
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Duane Nickull wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>All:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I would propose that we use a RUP/UMM type methodological approach to
>>>>>>>>>our work in this area.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>1. gather stakeholder requirements, technical requirements of what is
>>>>>>>>>needed in the Serialization.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>2. define the serialization first.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>3. work backwards based on the serialization to determine what must be
>>>>>>>>>present in the storage format.  IMO - the serialization requirements
>>>>>>>>>will create dependencies on the storage format.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>To me,  this is the correct and logical way to approach the problem.  I
>>>>>>>>>hereby volunteer to take a stab at the first draft of #1 above
>>>>>>>>>(requirements for the serialization).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Duane Nickull
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>--
>>>>>>>>>Senior Standards Strategist
>>>>>>>>>Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>http://www.adobe.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep-cc-review/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep-cc-review/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>--
>>>>>>>Senior Standards Strategist
>>>>>>>Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>>>>>>http://www.adobe.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>Senior Standards Strategist
>>>>>Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>>>>http://www.adobe.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep-cc-review/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>--
>>Senior Standards Strategist
>>Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>http://www.adobe.com
>>
>>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep-cc-review/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

-- 
Senior Standards Strategist
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://www.adobe.com





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