RE: [ws-rx-editors] Fw: [ws-rx] What spec versions should be referenced by the RDDL documents?

["Patil, Sanjay" <sanjay.patil@sap.com>]

I think the RDDL doc should reference the 'OASIS Standard' (or whatever
happens to be the highest status) and the 'Latest Version' of the
concerned specifications. Referencing all the spec versions that use a
namesapce from its RDDL doc might get unwieldy.

-- Sanjay

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robin Cover [mailto:robin@oasis-open.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 19:06 PM
> To: Doug Davis
> Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org; Mary McRae
> Subject: Re: [ws-rx-editors] Fw: [ws-rx] What spec versions 
> should be referenced by the RDDL documents?
> 
> Doug... in haste...
> 
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/rddl.html
> 
> The RDDL template provides a model for "This version:" and 
> "Previous version:"
> for the prose spec, schema(s), etc.
> 
> ==============================================================
> ==================
> This version:
> [link to this version of the specification] (include hyperlink)
> Previous version:
> [link to previous version of the specification] (include hyperlink) 
> ==============================================================
> ==================
> 
> I'm sure Mary would be happy to discuss changes/improvements 
> to the RDDL model
> if you'd like to suggest changes.
> 
> I don't have time to chase down the references just now, but 
> I recall that the
> W3C RDDL documents and the xmlsoap.org RDDLs both (though not 
> uniformally)
> make provision for citing multiple spec URIs so as to help the reader
> identify
> 
> * the current spec URI
> * other relevant spec URIs for specs which use the same namespace
> 
> I think it would be a good idea for a RDDL to provide a list of spec
> URIs for all versions of the spec which use a given 
> namespace.  Visiting
> any instance and inspecting the "This", "Latest", "Previous" should
> produce the chain of URIs, but the RDDL listing could provide a more
> efficient reference set if it included a URI for each of the specs
> (to date).
> 
> Here are a couple (not the best) examples:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/ns/ws-policy/
> http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/08/eventing/
> 
> I'll make a note to discuss this with Mary, as we have time.  She's
> TC Admin and the template keeper.
> 
> -rcc
> 
> Robin Cover
> OASIS, Chief Information Architect
> Editor, Cover Pages and XML Daily Newslink
> http://xml.coverpages.org/
> 
> 
> On Tue, 6 May 2008, Doug Davis wrote:
> 
> > The first two issues are kind of interesting. Does anyone 
> know how the use
> > of RDDL is supposed to work when the docs change over time but their
> > namespaces don't? How are we supposed to allow people to 
> easily reference
> > a particular version of the specs when multiple versions 
> use the same
> > namespace?
> > Whose idea was it to use RDDL anyway? :-)
> >
> > thanks
> > -Doug
> > ______________________________________________________
> > STSM  |  Web Services Architect  |  IBM Software Group
> > (919) 254-6905  |  IBM T/L 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
> > ----- Forwarded by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM on 05/06/2008 
> 07:55 AM -----
> >
> > Peter Niblett <peter_niblett@uk.ibm.com>
> > 05/02/2008 05:37 AM
> >
> > To
> > ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > cc
> >
> > Subject
> > [ws-rx] What spec versions should be referenced by the RDDL 
> documents?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > While I was doing Action Item 0143 I took a look at the 
> RDDL documents at
> >
> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702
> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrmp/200702
> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702
> >
> > and spotted a number of things that look like problems to me..
> >
> > 1. They have all been updated to talk about and point to 
> the CD 01 of the
> > latest versions of the specs (1.2 in the case of RM and 
> RMP, and 1.1 in
> > the case of MC). However since the namespace hasn't 
> changed, this means
> > that we no longer have RDDL documents associated with these 
> namespace that
> > point to the approved OASIS standard specifications.  Would 
> it not be more
> > appropriate to keep the RDDL documents pointing at the 
> current standard
> > until we have standard versions of the new specifications?  
> Apologies if
> > the TC has already discussed this, and decided to make this 
> update to the
> > RDDL documents.
> >
> > This is particularly noticeable, because the TC home pages 
> (both members
> > and public) contain links which claim to be for the 
> standard versions of
> > the specs, but actually take you to these RDDL documents 
> which point to
> > the new CDs.
> >
> > 2. The documents do try and contain a pointer to the 
> previous versions.
> > However they try to this by including a pointer in the 
> "Related Namespace"
> > section. Since the namespace hasn't changed, this turns out to be a
> > self-referencing link.
> >
> > For example the last line of  the RM RDDL at
> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702 is " Previous
> > WS-ReliableMessaging v1.1 namespace:
> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702   "
> >
> > (also the link in the MC RDDL implies that the previous 
> version of MC is
> > 1.1, when in fact it is 1.0)
> >
> > 3. The RDDL documents have links to new versions of the 
> Schema and WSDL
> > files. These new versions are at
> >
> > 
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702/wsrm-1.2-schema-2
> 00702.xsd
> > 
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200702/wsrm-1.2-wsdl-200702.wsdl
> > 
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702/wsmc-1.1-schema-2
> 00702.xsd
> > 
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702/wsmc-1.1-wsdl-200702.wsdl
> > 
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrmp/200702/wsrmp-1.2-schema
> -200702.xsd
> >
> >
> > However these aren't the files referenced by the CD's 
> currently in public
> > review. The CD's still reference the RM1.1 Errata 01, 
> RMP1.1 Errata 01,
> > MC1.0 Errata 01 versions of these files. Moreover the WSDLs 
> in the list
> > above actually import the Errata01 schemas, not the schemas 
> from the list
> > above. Given that the only difference between these "new 
> files" and the
> > Errata01 is one character in the copyright statement,  I would have
> > thought that the RDDLs should link to the Errata01 
> versions, so that they
> > reference the same files that are declared as Normative by 
> the new specs
> > (once the new versions become standard).
> >
> >
> > Peter Niblett
> > IBM Senior Technical Staff Member
> > Lead Architect WebSphere Messaging
> > +44 1962 815055
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and 
> Wales with number
> > 741598.
> > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, 
> Hampshire PO6 3AU
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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_workgr
> oups.php 
> 
>