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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xacml message

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


Subject: RE: [xacml] REST Profile - General Plan


> > I am not clear on what the general plan for this work is.
> 
> My proposal was the following:
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml/201205/msg00006.html
> 
> 
My bad, I missed this message.

> > First, Robin Cover noted that the IANA submission must refer to a
> > document that is either an IETF RFC or an OASIS Standard (in our
> case).
> > I assume that we are not doing an RFC, so we must bring the Media
> > Types doc to Oasis Standard before doing the IANA submission. Agreed?
> 
> Actually, I'm leaning more towards an RFC:
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml/201205/msg00006.html

Ok, I am ignorant of what level of approval the RFC needs to get. Can you just get a number and write it up as informational, or do you need to create a working group, etc.?

> 
> 
> > Second, I assume the Media types document should refer to a document
> > which has at least some level of approval. Does everyone agree on
> this?
> > Is CD sufficient? CS?
> 
> Per Robin's statement above it should be OS, right?

What I was thinking of, was the case where the Media Types doc simply pointed at the REST Profile. If we are dropping the media types document, this question is moot.
> 
> 
> > Next question is, do we plan to put the JSON material and everything
> > else related in the REST Profile doc, or have a separate doc for some
> > of it?
> 
> Current consensus seems to be a separate document. David Brossard
> proposed his 'JSON over HTTP' profile:
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml/201205/msg00012.html
> But we may have to rename it?
> 

It may make sense to have a separate document for the JSON format of requests and perhaps policies, but I would think the material about how to put it in a message and process requests and responses would involve a lot of duplication between the two documents, which is usually a bad idea.

I would like to hear other opinions on this.

> 
> > Assuming a single doc, are we planning to complete it and then move
> it
> > to CS and OS or attempt to standardize a preliminary doc which is
> > missing some of the material?
> 
> I vote we complete it and then move it forward.
> 
> 
> > Assuming we will complete it and then move it forward, is there any
> > necessary ordering between reaching any particular stage of the REST
> > and media Profiles?
> 
> The JSON profile is independent of anything else, as is the
> registration of the XML format.
> 
> The REST profile needs a representation (and would ideally reference
> the JSON and XML formats), but the meat of the profile can move forward
> without knowledge of the details of any such representation. So we may
> need to wait until the XML and JSON stuff is "done" to finalize the
> REST profile, but we can surely work on it in the mean time.
>

 
So far what I have heard (outside the TC) is a lot of interest in REST with no XML, but not a whole lot of interest in XML over HTTP. What do others think?

Hal


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