[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: call for vote
Matt, My responses to Farrukh's comments are in email message http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/regrep-query/200110/msg00014.html I believe that all of the functionality of Browse and Drill Down is adequately covered by the FilterQuery options presented in the FilterQuery proposal. -- Len At 02:23 PM 10/9/01, Matthew MacKenzie wrote: >Team, > >First off, my apologies for my recent lack of attention to this news group >and the issues that are flying around. We are releasing product this month, >and things get hectic for me whenever we do that :-) > >Len, since I probably missed any discussion on this stuff at the last >telecon - where do you stand with regards to Farrukh's comments on Filter >Query not yet supporting all that it needs to support? I have been taking >the standpoint (probably wrongly so) that we will be leaving drill down >query in our registry until version 3 or later anyway, and that all of these >issues will be resolved by then seeing as they are relatively minor nits for >someone with a 1.0 implementation to lean on. If what Farrukh says is true, >we need resolution in the form of leaving drill down in the spec, or adding >the necessary functionality to Filter Query. > >I know I voted YES, but I admit that I did not study this stuff and do any >comparisons. > >Regards, > >Matt > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@sun.com> >To: "Dan Chang" <dtchang@us.ibm.com> >Cc: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@sun.com>; <lgallagher@nist.gov>; "David >RR Webber" <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>; "Matthew MacKenzie" ><matt@xmlglobal.com>; <sfuger@AIAG.ORG>; <jneu@vitria.com>; ><regrep-query@lists.oasis-open.org> >Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 9:33 AM >Subject: Re: call for vote > > > > I vote as follows: > > > > 1. NO > > > > Reason is that we cannot remove this section until all of its >functionality is > > covered by filter query proposal. > > Please see my message: > > > > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/regrep-query/200110/msg00009.html > > > > and Len's response acknowledging the limitations: > > > > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/regrep-query/200110/msg00014.html > > > > 2. No. Same reasons as No vote on (1) > > > > 3. YES > > > > Team, I would like to emphasize that I have tried to work out these issues >in a > > constructive manner. It seems that there is no > > recognition that the missing functionality is necessary. The missing > > functionality is essential to many use cases > > and many of those use cases are supported by other registry >specifications. > > > > I will be glad to change my vote to a Yes vote if we can have a > > RegistryObjectQuery > > that allows queries based on dynamic metadata defines on RegistryObject >(Slot, > > Classification, Association, ExtrenalLink, ExternalIdentifier) as well as > > filters on the static attributes of RegistryObject (id, name, >description). > > > > Note that the above condition for a Yes vote is much less than the list of > > things I wanted to see improved. I have offered compromises > > at every step but have regrettably not seen any reciprocity. > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Farrukh > > > > > > Dan Chang wrote: > > > > > Team, > > > > > > Please vote YES, NO, or ABSTAIN on each of the following proposals. >Please > > > vote by the end of 10/10. Thanks: > > > (1) Remove Section 8.1. > > > Rationale: Per our agreement and work, the functionality provided >by > > > Section 8.1 is now fully supported by the revised Section 8.2. > > > (2) Adopt the revised Section 8.2. > > > Rationale: The revised Section 8.2, as proposed by Len, is >consistent > > > with the draft RIM 1.1 and has no major issues left unresolved. > > > Background: On page 6, HasPathBranch is left with three >alternatives, > > > with the following understanding: > > > (a) PathFilter: This is completely specified given Len's new > > > proposal to add ClassificationNode.getLevelNumber() in RIM. > > > (b) XpathNodeExpression and PathElementFiler: These will be > > > removed unless their associated issues are resolved in time. > > > (3) Move Section 8.4 to Section 8.1. > > > Rationale: Ad Hoc Query covers FilterQuery and SQLQuery and should >be > > > discussed before them. > > > Result: Section 8.4 will be left empty and to be fixed editorially > > > later. > > > > > > Regards, Dan > > > > > > Metadata Management Technology and Standard > > > IBM DBTI for e-Business > > > Notes: Dan Chang/Santa Teresa/IBM@IBMUS > > > Internet: dtchang@us.ibm.com > > > VM: IBMUSM50(DTCHANG) > > > Phone: (408)-463-2319 > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ************************************************************** Len Gallagher LGallagher@nist.gov NIST Work: 301-975-3251 Bldg 820 Room 562 Home: 301-424-1928 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8970 USA Fax: 301-948-6213 **************************************************************
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC