[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Meeting reminder and draft agenda
Breininger, Kathryn R wrote:
The latets short list of bugs is present here:This is a meeting reminder and draft agenda for our ebXML Registry TC meeting Thursday, October 26th, at 8:00am PT. Please send any additional agenda items. The telecon number and password: USA toll: 1-210-795-0625 USA Toll free: 866-617-3597 PARTICIPANT PASSCODE (same for all countries): 1739140 International numbers; France Toll: 33-1-70-70-84-56 Toll free: 080-510-0984 UK Toll: 44-20-7108-6391 Toll free: 0800-279-9632 For other countries please contact Kathryn Breininger directly (sorry, the vendor does not have a number for Turkey yet..). Draft Agenda: 1. Approval of previous meeting minutes for September 28th 2. Minute taker 3. ebXML Registry Profile for Web Ontology status 4. User Guide for profiles status (see minutes from last meeting) 5. ebXML Registry 3.0 issues <<<http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/regrep/200606/msg00006.html>>> <http://ebxmlrr.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Spec/regrep#Bugs_in_ebXML_Registry_specs> I am copying the current list inline below for ease of reference... Bugs in ebXML Registry specs
Andrzej responds: I'm not sure you should be so quick to judge this a bug/mistake. I can see many scenarios where it would be very convenient to be able to create objects where you specify only the lid and have the registry generate the unique id (uuid). We have a number of those in the project I'm working on. I think it's a valuable feature and that the spec is correct as written. If the application doesn't care what the id is, why should we have to specify it, when the registry can easily generate a unique UUID on our behalf? This doesn't make any sense to me. From a practical users perspective I vote a strong -1 on making this a bug! And +1 one on changing the implementation to suit the spec. I think the implementation is incorrect and the spec is just fine. Andrzej's argument makes sense (Nikola), but question is what to do with the rim.xsd as "id" is required under "IdentifiableType".
-- Regards, Farrukh Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]