FWIW,
The ISO object identifier (OID see X.660 in reference cited below) has
the benefit that all IDs are guaranteed globally unique and traceable. Any owner
of an ID instantly becomes the naming authority for numbers under its branch.
This approach has many advantages over the "pseudo" unique approach provided by
UUID. UUIDs are only statistically unique and there is some finite risk of an ID
collision. Given a UUID there is no way to trace its origin. Given an OID, you
can trace the one and only one worldwide tree of naming authorities to find the
"owner".
We have used OIDs in ANSI metering standards for meter identifiers, serial
numbers, customer identifiers, and network identifiers. They are also
extensible and compressible.
Marty
In a message dated 2/9/2006 1:46:48 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jon.bosak@sun.com writes:
Hello
UBL TC,
At the Manhattan UBL TC meeting, I took the AI to check on
UUID
vs. GUID and figure out which of these was proprietary.
The
answer to that question is: GUID is a proprietary Microsoft
implementation
of UUID. We can't be referencing proprietary
specifications here, so
we have to use UUID. (The OASIS ebXML
Registry Standard has always
used UUID, by the way.)
Consequently, we will have to change all
occurrences of GUID in
the schemas to UUID. I'll enter this in the
issues list once we
settle on a UUID reference.
The reference
question is not as simple as one would hope. For
background, see the
Wikipedia entry on UUID. Here's my take after
reading that article
and doing a little bit of checking around:
- The original 1997 UUID
spec from The Open Group is not what we
want, despite the fact
that this is the spec referenced in ebRR
3.0 as
[UUID] DCE 128 bit Universal Unique Identifier
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009629399/apdxa.htm#tagcjh_20
-
Possible UUID specs include:
- ISO/IEC 11578:1996, which
is not freely available online
- IETF RFC 4122, which is
available at
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4122.txt
http://www.rfc-archive.org/getrfc.php?rfc=4122
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4122.txt
- ITU-T
Rec. X.667 (2004) | ISO/IEC 9834-8:2005, which is
based on RFC 4122 and can be found in "prepublished" form at
http://asn1.elibel.tm.fr/en/tools/oid/standards.htm
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/X.667.pdf
Ordinarily I would
go with the RFC simply because it's freely
available. However, the
ITU-T/ISO/IEC spec is also freely
available as an exception to the usual
rule, and I'm informed that
an agreement between ITU and ISO will keep it
that way. So my
recommendation is to reference that one unless
someone sees a
reason not to.
Please post any thoughts you might
have on this, and let's aim to
resolve the issue in next week's Atlantic TC
call.
Jon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To
unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates
this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
|