[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [uddi-spec-comment] Public Comment
Hi Karthick, It is possible to define a hierarchy of categories for a user-defined taxonomy, kindly check section F.2 Grouping Categories in the UDDI v3.0.2 specification which talks about how categories are represented within a keyedReferenceGroup. keyedReferenceGroup provides a logical grouping for the keyedReferences defined within them. The tModelKey within a keyedReference uniquely identifies the taxonomy. The keyName within a keyedReference uniquely identifies the category name. The keyValue within a keyedReference uniquely identifies the category value. So as for as inquiry is concerned the current representation works fine. But there is no standard representation for defining taxonomy with a hierarchy of categories currently in the specification. But each registry vendor provides a custom mechanism to populate user defined taxonomies with a hierarchy of categories. We don't think there is a necessity to modify the schema for keyedReferences as this is applicable only for inquiry and is not relevant during taxonomy creation. Hope it's clear. Thanks, - Rajesh Koilpillai -----Original Message----- From: comment-form@oasis-open.org [mailto:comment-form@oasis-open.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 11:52 AM To: uddi-spec-comment@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [uddi-spec-comment] Public Comment Comment from: ksankara@webmethods.com Name: Karthick Sankarachary Title: Lead Engineer Organization: webMethods, Inc. Regarding Specification: UDDI V3.0 Correct me if I'm wrong, but by the looks of the latest specification, it is not possible to define a hierarchy of categories, or to be more precise, a taxonomy. I can't really use derived categories to represent a hierarchy, because by definition, the categories in a taxonomy may and will be unrelated to each other. To illustrate my use case, please take a look see at the taxonomy at http://www.rarespecies.org.na/InfoSys/IMAGES/buffalo/Taxonomy.gif. I think our best bet is keyedRefereceGroup. Unfortunately, it is not recursive and only allows for one level of nesting of categories, by virtue of the fact that a keyedReferenceGroup cannot contain another keyedReferenceGroup. So, that begs the question, would it at all be possible to change the type of keyedReferenceGroup like so: <xsd:complexType name="keyedReferenceGroup" final="restriction"> <xsd:sequence minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xsd:choice> <xsd:element ref="uddi:keyedReference"/> <xsd:element ref="uddi:keyedReferenceGroup"/> <xsd:choice> </xsd:sequence> <xsd:attribute name="tModelKey" type="uddi:tModelKey" use="required"/> </xsd:complexType> Best Regards, Karthick Sankarachary --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: uddi-spec-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: uddi-spec-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]