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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep message

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

Subject: Regrep: I2C questions

I'm addressing this (separately) to the OASIS Regrep list, the
EBXML Regrep list, and the RFC 2483 authors.

Quite a few issues arose during Thursday's OASIS Regrep TC
meeting in San Jose.  This is one of them:  how to specify
a request for metadata about a resource.

In RFC 2483 (THTTP), as written originally and as I've revised 
it unofficially, there is a resolution service request "I2C"
(was L2C/N2C).  As revised, the relevant section reads:

 3.5  I2C (URI to URC):

   URCs (Uniform Resource Characteristics) are descriptions of other
   resources. This request allows us to obtain a description of the
   resource identified by a URN, as opposed to the resource itself.  The
   description might be a bibliographic citation, a digital signature, a
   revision history, etc. This document does not specify the content of
   any response to a URC request. That content is expected to vary from
   one resolver to another.

   The format of any response to an I2C request MUST be communicated
   using the Content Type header, as is standard HTTP practice. The
   Accept: header SHOULD be honored.

The request would be an HTTP GET with a URL something like


As designed, this request allows for format negotiation over the
format of the URC, which for the purpose of OASIS could be in
more than one format (HTML or XML, for example) but would always
contain the same set of ISO/IEC 11179-specified metadata (the same
content).  "URC" doesn't specify content, however, and I'm concerned 
that format negotiation is not well suited to content negotiation.

So I had floated the idea of making a separate request, call it 
I2X, for the OASIS-specified content (link to resource plus list
of links to all related data).

As I began to think about extensions and certain in-house uses
of THTTP, I began to wonder whether it was such a good idea to
break out different requests for different sets of metadata.
I can also see that the information returned might be determined
in part on the status of the requestor (you might hide some
contact info for the Submitting Org from general public, for 

These considerations lead me to two questions:

Is it acceptable for OASIS Regrep purposes that an I2C request returns 
11179 metadata from an OASIS-conformant registry, but may return
something else from some other URI resolver?  

Is it acceptable for OASIS Regrep purposes that the information returned
from an I2C request may be a different set (from among the totality
of information held by the registry) from one request to another,
depending on the registry's business rules and the requestor's

regards, Terry

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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC