[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] Fw: [ws-rx] What spec versions should be referencedby the RDDL documents?
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Patil, Sanjay wrote: > > 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. "might get unwieldy" Yeah, I agree: in some cases, that's probably true. Cheers, -rcc > > -- 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 >> >> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]