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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

security-services message

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

Subject: [security-services] versioning


I've gotten confused on versioning. It seems to me that namespaces are schema versioning and the 
major/minor message versioning is for application versioning, and that one needs both. To date we've 
often overloaded namespace to also mean semantic versioning.

Regarding versioning as discussed in draft-cantor-versioning-01, is the following a 
correct interpretation of what you say?

1. major and minor version are conveyed in the message

2. when a major schema change is made the XML namespace is revised as well as the major version, but when
the major version changes the namespace need not change if the schema has not had major changes.

Major schema changes requiring a namespace change:
- add a required element or attribute to an existing type. (regardless of whether the schema was open with any)
- Remove an existing element or attribute
- Redefine a simple type, other than restriction of range

(Note that adding a new global element/type is not on this list)

Although I understand the goal of minimizing schema changes to support minor versioning, wouldn't
a namespace change be required to enable a validating parser to use the correct schema to validate changes
such as adding new global elements or adding optional elements/attributes to existing types as well?

If a namespace is needed to validate (not always performed) couldn't a receiver validate against an acceptable schema as stated in a message (different messages could have different namespaces),  while using major/minor message versions for semantic understanding?

Thus a receiver would use the namespace to validate the schema, message version (major.minor) to ensure use
of the correct namespaces and also to manage correct semantics. In this case a namespace change might not
require a major version change.

Does it make sense to consider versions as a triple: (major, minor, namespace), where multiple namespaces
might be appropriate for major.minor

regards, Frederick
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia Mobile Phones

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]