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] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [regrep] FW: Namespace management




Chiusano Joseph wrote:

><Quote>
>I won't tell you what's the best way of implementing it in the spec, but
>creating another entity is not an option to me. The data model of the
>Registry is already quite complex. Maybe you can use a classification
>schemas that would indicate that this particular object must be unique
>in this particular way and just hardcode it in the product.
></Quote>
>
>Absolutely Max. If we were to create a "best practice" or binding that
>enabled elements/attributes/datatypes to be registered as
>RegistryObjects (working with the Content Management mechanism), one
>could simply associate these artifacts with their pertinent namespace
>using classification, or association.
>
+1 on Joe's suggestion of defining a binding to handle the namespace 
management use cases.

I have assumed all along that name space management would be handled by 
defining a binding for XML Schema to ebXML Registry (just like we define 
a binding for WSDL, HL7 etc.). Such a binding would define how 
namespaces get automatically cataloged within the registry and thus 
become automatically searchable. Part of such a binding would be the 
definition of template ad hoc queries that cover common namespace 
discovery use cases. Such a binding would be another best practice paper 
in my opinion rather than part of ebRIM and ebRS specs.

>
>Joe
>
>
>Max Voskob wrote:
>  
>
>>David and all,
>>
>>I think it's not about prefixes or how you declare your namespaces in the
>>instance documents.
>>
>>Imagine an organisation where 25 departments are creating different XML
>>documents and formalise them with all sorts of documentation including XML
>>Schemas. How do they ensure that the new namespace ID they've just come up
>>with is not already used somewhere else within the organisation?
>>Sure, they can write a 25 page guide how to name their namespaces (if they
>>can't they email me and I'll write one for them :), but it's hard to
>>reinforce.
>>If I can go to my enterprise registry or its federated node (not sure I use
>>the right wording here) and find out if the NS is in use, by who, where the
>>schemas are and all that sort of information.
>>
>>I won't tell you what's the best way of implementing it in the spec, but
>>creating another entity is not an option to me. The data model of the
>>Registry is already quite complex. Maybe you can use a classification
>>schemas that would indicate that this particular object must be unique in
>>this particular way and just hardcode it in the product.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Max
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "David RR Webber - XML ebusiness" <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
>>To: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
>>Cc: "MACIAS Paul" <PMACIAS@lmi.org>; "OASIS_RegRep (E-mail)"
>><regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
>>Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 6:33 PM
>>Subject: Re: [regrep] FW: Namespace management
>>
>>Joe,
>>
>>I'm very troubled that this whole namespace fixation is
>>chasing after a false god.   I hope we can head this
>>off before it grows to be a vast beast that
>>threatens to consume us!
>>
>>The system I have envisioned for the CAM mechanism
>>does away with the need to have strict uniqueness,
>>while guaranteeing that WITHIN YOUR OWN CONTEXT
>>you are able to express the necessary semantic
>>resolution that you require.
>>
>>I think our Federal XML WG folks need to take heed
>>here - before they create a bureau of namespaces.
>>
>>I stressed the above to show how this is different.  I guess I
>>never bought into the premise from the W3C that
>>you HAD to have a unique prefix on your XML, else
>>it would not "work".   I find this flawed, and further more
>>users react badly when asked to add prefixes to tags,
>>and mapping software reacts even worse when asked
>>to manage and move content so labelled.
>>
>>Here's how the adaptive approach works instead - and
>>I'll talk about real world parallel in live systems to
>>illustrate this too.
>>
>>A registry server is identified to a federation server,
>>and within your local context (an assembly) it is
>>assigned an alias (some short character sequence)
>>with an associated physical address to the interface
>>to that registry.
>>
>>Now I use that alias as a prefix to a UID value, to
>>identify the reference I need as a content cross-reference
>>within my CAM template.
>>
>>Now of course - I do not care that someone else is
>>using the exact same alias for some other registry
>>in their CAM document elsewhere.
>>
>>This could only be a potential issue if another
>>assembly document included into it both mine
>>and the other assembly.  But even then - using the
>>include as a prefix - negates the collisions.
>>
>>The power of this system is that anyone can
>>call any <tagsoup> item whatever they need to
>>in their local context and usage, but denote it
>>in the content reference:
>>
>><thisworks>
>>   <mine>
>>       <city/>
>>   </mine>
>>   <his>
>>      <city/>
>>   </his>
>>   <yours>
>>      <city/>
>>   </yours>
>></thisworks>
>>
>>and then
>>
>><contentreferences>
>>   <registry alias="mine" address="http://foobar.com/port:1000"/>
>>   <registry alias="yours" address="http://somebar.com/port:9000"/>
>>   <content name='//mine/city' reference="mine:UID010001"/>
>>   <content name='//his/city' reference="mine:UID078901"/>
>>   <content name='//yours/city' reference="yours:UID055501"/>
>></contentreferences>
>>
>>Bottom line is this simple and clean means makes the CAM
>>system a breeze when including content from multiple sub-assemblies.
>>Essentially you never need to worry about collisions in the underlying
>>content fragments - because you can always resolve references.
>>
>>Of course by doing this we remove the need for namespace police,
>>and even the need to create complex mechanisms in our ebXML
>>Registry implementations to support the namespace police.
>>
>>Effectively the federation server is able to act as the domain
>>locator for aliases and content references.  This is a much
>>cleaner simpler and self-managing system.
>>
>>In real live systems- notice there is nothing to stop me
>>have three companies all called "IBM Corporation",
>>one is the Italian Bread Makers, another is the
>>Industrial Brick Makers, and the other is the
>>Intra-Banking Machines.   Reference the state business registry
>>to find out which one does what.
>>
>>Cheers, DW.
>>=====================================================
>>Message text written by Chiusano Joseph
>>    
>>
>>Paul,
>>
>>This is directly related to the e-mail I cross-posted from XML-DEV 2
>>evenings ago (on a Namespace Management function). I am hoping that we
>>can include this in the v4 Registry specs, or in a best practice or
>>binding-type document.
>>
>>More details:
>>
>><QuoteFromJessica>
>>I am researching the current ability and/or purposed requirements of
>>ebXML and the Federal Registry regarding namespaces.
>>My specific interest is whether there is the ability or requirement for
>>a Registry to manage namespaces for an organization
>>to ensure at an enterprise level that a namespace is unique (i.e. two
>>different organizations are not using the same URI).
>></QuoteFromJessica>
>>
>>No explicit ability in ebXML registry (yet).
>>
>><QuoteFromJessica>
>>Additionally, I want to know whether any automated governance is being
>>built-in to the Registry to help organizations
>>create their URIs so that they stay within the requirements of their
>>organization (i.e. an organization has defined that
>>they only will use one enterprise namespace, the system would deny a
>>division of the organization the ability to register
>>their own URI).
>></QuoteFromJessica>
>>
>>This quote started with governance and gravitated toward security - I'll
>>address it from were it wound up (security). If a namespace identifier
>>were a RegistryObject, this would simply be done using the access
>>control mechanisms defined in the Registry specs.
>>
>>- Joe<
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------
>>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------
>>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>>    
>>

-- 
Regards,
Farrukh




----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>




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