RE: [xdi] Groups - XDI RDF Model V5 (xdi-rdf-model-v5.pdf) uploaded

["Barnhill, William" <barnhill_william@bah.com>]

I understand and agree that HTTP binding will likely be the one most used
initially, but I'm against tightly coupling the XDI protocol to an HTTP
binding. I think we should stay focused on an abstract protocol and cover
that in the XDI protocol document, each binding in a separate document, with
http being the first binding.  At it's heart the XDI protocol seems to me to
be very RESTful (Create, Put, Get, Delete), with the caveat that fragments
of documents are addressable not just the documents. I imagine that the
abstract protocol will focus on XML document exchanges to enable those
operations, and I'm not convinced we need to invent another protocol from
scratch.  One existing protocol that's caught my eye for this purpose is
WS-Resource Transfer (WS-RT).  While designed to be encapsulated in a SOAP
envelope it could be used outside of SOAP. It is backed by IBM, HP, BEA and
others, and I believe I read that they intend to submit it to OASIS.

Btw, with HTTP binding do you mean a RESTful binding or a SOAP Binding? I
think they should be treated as two separate bindings, and even if WS-RT is
not used for the abstract protocol it could be used for the SOAP binding.
This could also eliminate the need for an XMPP binding, since XMPP has
SOAP/XMPP.

What I envision for bindings is:
   RESTful using HTTP methods to exchange XDI RDF documents
   Semantically-RESTful using SPARQL and SPARL-Update Language
   SOAP using WS-RT
   XMPP using WS-RT through SOAP/XMPP

I haven't yet, but will read the RDF model V5 before the meeting in time to
send comments to the list, if I have any, and will be at the meeting.

Thanks,
Bill
--
William Barnhill                       Phone: (315) 491-6765
Associate                               Email: barnhill_william@bah.com
Booz | Allen | Hamilton             i-name: =Bill.Barnhill
"Delivering results that endure"

-----Original Message-----
From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 7:34 PM
To: 'Sakimura, Nat（全社サーバへ移行済み）'; xdi@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xdi] Groups - XDI RDF Model V5 (xdi-rdf-model-v5.pdf) uploaded

Nat,

In the binding of the XDI protocol to HTTP, I agree completely. This XDI RDF
model proposal still focuses just on the abstract protocol, and not any
bindings yet.

=Drummond

-----Original Message-----
From: Sakimura, Nat（全社サーバへ移行済み） [mailto:sakimura@spmd.nri.co.jp]

Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:05 AM
To: drummond.reed@cordance.net; xdi@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xdi] Groups - XDI RDF Model V5 (xdi-rdf-model-v5.pdf) uploaded

Don't we need to specify the status code of the http response for both
success and failure?

Nat

> -----Original Message-----
> From: drummond.reed@cordance.net [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:55 PM
> To: xdi@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [xdi] Groups - XDI RDF Model V5
> (xdi-rdf-model-v5.pdf) uploaded
>
> This is an editorial update to the XDI RDF proposal to update
> references and add some additional explanatory text. No substantive
> changes from V4.
>
>  -- Mr Drummond Reed
>
> The document named XDI RDF Model V5 (xdi-rdf-model-v5.pdf) has been
> submitted by Mr Drummond Reed to the OASIS XRI Data Interchange (XDI)
> TC document repository.
>
> Document Description:
> PDF of V5 of the XDI RDF model proposal.
>
> View Document Details:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xdi/document.php?
> document_id=24064
>
> Download Document:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xdi/download.php/
> 24064/xdi-rdf-model-v5.pdf
>
>
> PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for you, your email
> application may be breaking the link into two pieces.
> You may be able to copy and paste the entire link address into the
> address field of your web browser.
>
> -OASIS Open Administration
>

smime.p7s