XDI TC

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@onename.com>]

This in reply to Eamonn's question (quoted below) about "What is the XDI
activity?" that I referred to in a message on Monday.

At our f2f in February we made a decision to narrow the scope of the XRI
TC to syntax and resolution and push some of the original XRI TC
deliverables, specifically XRI-based data exchange, into a separate
future TC. This was articulated in section 2, paragraph 5 of the revised
charter passed in March:

"Subsequent to the completion of this [XRI[ work, a follow-on TC is
expected to define a mechanism for exchanging data associated with an
XRI, including a schema for associating metadata with XRI-identified
resources and a REST-like (Representational State Transfer) service to
operate on this metadata and the data it describes. Such a service would
provide a platform for integrating XRIs with directory-related
specifications such as LDAP, DSML, and SPML."

Ever since then, we have informally refered to this as the "XDI TC" (XDI
standing for "XRI Data Interchange"). As the XRI 1.0 specification
reaches Committee Draft status, those of us interested in this follow-on
TC are preparing a formal charter for the XDI TC.

I invite anyone on the current TC (or anyone monitoring this list)
interested in participating in the XDI TC or in helping to draft/review
the charter to let me know. (Note: I will be offline in meetings through
next Wednesday morning so replies may be delayed.)

Thanks,

=Drummond


-----Original Message-----
From: Eamonn Neylon [mailto:eneylon@manifestsolutions.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 3:58 AM
To: Drummond Reed; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xri] Status of secure resolution

Drummond

[snip]

>>d) Leave it to the soon-to-be-proposed XDI TC?

This is the one I haven't got a clue about - what is XDI? Is it a
specialization of XRI (in which case I suspect that shifting secure
resolution to it may distract from its purpose), or something else?

>>We need to close on this quickly so we know how we will treat the
>>issue in the 08 (gold candidate) draft, so please take a moment to
>>post your opinion relative to the above options.

I suspect (c) is the best path, but would like to know that the secure
resolution spec would be visible (or at least the activity visible)
before
the main specification is approved by OASIS. Also, I'd like to know
about
what the XDI activity would plan to cover (and presumably why it would
therefore be an option) - advance apologies if this has been addressed
in
this TC and I've missed it.

Regards

Eamonn

Eamonn Neylon
Manifest Solutions
Tel: +44 1869 357156
http://www.manifestsolutions.com/