Re: [regrep] ebRIM

[Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>]

Paul Spencer wrote:

>In the eGov TC, we currently have a sub-committee looking at the use of the
>ebXML registry for storing schema components for Government use. As part of
>this project, we have been mapping various metadata models to the ebRIM.
>
>We have found that there are several places where we need to map a person to
>the RIM, but the RIM only has a class for "User". Examples from the UK
>metadata standard are Creator and Contributor.
>
>The position is similar for an organisation, which can also be a Creator or
>Contributor, and can also be a Publisher.
>
>Would it not be sensible to create classes for Person and Organisation, and
>define roles derived from these classes? It would be great to have this
>before version 3 of the ebRIM is finalised as that is going to be the basis
>for this work.
>
>  
>
Hi Paul,

We do have an existing Organization class. We also have an existing User 
class which is close in meeting the needs of a Person class.
I agree with you that ebRIM needs to have a Person class that is 
distinct from a User class because Person is needed in different context 
than User and also because Person does not need to have their public key 
stored with the registry.

The solution could be very simple. We could rename the existing User 
class as Person and then derive a User class from the Person class such 
that the User class has no knew attributes. We store public keys for 
Users but not for Persons that are not Users.

I am currently working on ebRIM/ebRS 2.6 and am willing to make this 
minor change if I can get the approval of the regrep TC.
What do people think? Does any one see any issues. Kathryn, could we 
please add this to the agenda for next week's meeting? Lets discuss this 
issue over email before next weeks meeting and reach a decision during 
the meeting. Thanks and thanks to Paul for the good suggestion.

-- 
Regards,
Farrukh