[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes of the XRI/XDI Joint F2F Meeting 4/18-20 San Diego
Following
are the minutes of the joint face-to-face meeting of the XRI and XDI Technical
Committees April 18-20 at the OASIS Symposium in San Diego. ATTENDING
IN PERSON (ALL DAYS) Les
Chasen Wil
Tan Marty
Schleiff Laurie
Rae Bill
Barnhill Marcus
Sabadello Drummond
Reed ATTENDING
VIA TELECON (WEDNESDAY) Gabe
Wachob ATTENDING
VIA TELECON (THURSDAY) Gabe
Wachob Steve
Churchill *****
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18 ***** ---INTRODUCTIONS--- We
all introduced ourselves – it being the first time many had met face-to-face
– and welcomed Markus Sabadello to the TC, especially considering he had
flown all the way from Austria. Markus is a very active OpenXRI contributor, so
it will be particularly good to have another active implementor closely
involved in the specification process. ---XRI
RESOLUTION 2.0 WORKING DRAFT 11--- The
main topic of the first day was XRI resolution. Drummond gave an overview of
the partially-completed Working Draft 11 (WD11), showing the new OASIS template
(many thanks to TC Secretary Laurie Rae for doing the conversion) as the new
sections that have been added for: *
Discovering XRDS Documents from HTTP(S) URIs (i.e., the Yadis section) *
CanonicalID Verification *
Service References (a new subsection of the Synonym and Reference Processing section) ---OPEN
ISSUES--- Our
next work item was to deal with the remaining open issues on: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/Xri2Cd02/ResWorkingDraft11
===
Issue #40 – "nodefault" subparameter of Resolution Media Type
(_xrd_r) parameter. === (Note:
this was originally called the "exact" subparameter.) In
a short discussion (which didn't actually conclude until Thurs. evening), we
concluded that this parameter was indeed needed, and would serve simply to
override any default match on the specified service endpoint type. Issue
closed. ===
Issue #41 – Processing Rules for HTTP Accept Headers === The
proposal from Wil is to restrict Accept header usage to Service Media Type
parameter (_xrd_m). After a long discussion, it was agreed that this would very
much simplify the spec. One action item was assigned: #
WIL and LES to check XDI.org's GRS proxy resolver logs to confirm that this
will not heavily interfere with at least one current implementation. Otherwise,
issue closed. ===
Issue #43 – Simplify Processing of Multiple Accept Headers === Wil's
proposal was to not require proxy resolvers to weight accept header values per
RFC 2616. After discussion we agreed that as far as the spec is concerned, we
should stay compliant with RFC 2616. This is easier now that the Accept header
will only be interpreted as the _xrd_m parameter. Issue
closed. ===
Remaining Open Issues (#16 and #44) === Both
of these issues are pending on XRI Syntax 2.1, and should be relatively easy to
close once it is closed. #
DRUMMOND to reflect all these closed issues in WD11. ---SERVICE
ENDPOINT SELECTION LOGIC (FORMERLY ISSUE #17)--- Drummond
explained that he completely rewrote the service endpoint (SEP) selection
section to explain the new SEP selection logic at: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriCd02/SepSelection
We
reviewed the logic and the pseudocode on the wiki. Overall we were relatively
happy except for the complexity of the final step of the default selection
logic, which was still quite complex and hard to understand. Markus
made a suggestion to simplify the logic of selecting default SEPs by selecting
those with the highest number of positive selection element (SELs). This suggestion
was stunning in its simplicity and has a much better result because it means
that in the case of a "tie" between two or more default SEPs, both
are returned rather than the current “lockout” condition. It was
agreed to make this change. #
MARKUS to update the wiki page with this new default SEP selection rule. #
DRUMMOND to incorporate this simplification into WD11. ---
DISCOVERING XRDS DOCUMENTS FROM HTTP(S) URIS --- We
reviewed the migration of the text from the Yadis document into this new
section. We agreed that the basic instructions were present but that it could
be restructured for easier presentation and understanding. #
DRUMMOND to proceed with editing. *****
THURSDAY, APRIL 19 ***** ---XRI
SYNTAX 2.1--- The
main focus of Thursday was XRI Syntax, and specifically the open issues on: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriCd02/XriSyntax2dot1
---NORMALIZATION
FOR GLOBAL XREFS--- The
main topic we discussed was normalization of global-xrefs (see the definition
of this ABNF rule on the 2.1 ABNF page on the wiki at http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriCd02/XriAbnf2dot1).
The
key issue was whether XRIs that use global-xrefs should be normalized into XRIs
that use only local-xrefs, i.e., should the following XRIs normalize to be
equivalent: #1: =example+tag #2: =example*(+tag) #3: =example!(+tag) There
was consensus that #3 should not be equivalent to either #1 or #2. However
there was a very long discussion about whether #1 should normalize to #2 or
vice versa. The
primary arguments in favor of normalization are: a) to keep the normalized syntax
simple, and b) to eliminate any potential confusion over the different
properties of local-xrefs and global-xrefs. The
primary argument in favor of not normalizing are: a) to keep XRI composition
and parsing rules simple (so all XRIs are “WYSIWYG” – What
You See Is What You Get), and b) that local-xrefs and global-xrefs are actually
different “grammatical” constructs as Les put it, and thus should
not be normalized because they actually have different interpretations and
enable construction of identifier graphs with different properties. A
straw poll at the end of the conversation had 2 TC members in favor of
normalization and 5 TC members against it, so we will proceed in that direction
as we prepare the spec and see if any other issues come up. However there was
strong consensus that if all six context symbols (plus typeless, which is the
absence of a context symbol) had distinct “grammatical” meanings,
these needed to be made clear in the spec. #
DRUMMOND to prepare a wiki page proposing grammatical definitions of all six
context symbols plus typeless. ---XRI:
VS XRI://--- The
other key issue we discussed was moving to “xri:” vs.
“xri://” as the scheme identifier. There is general consensus that
xri: is the better, “cleaner” scheme identifier for XRI, especially
in 2.1 syntax, however the key consideration is backwards compatability. We had
a long discussion about how the upgrade pain could be minimized, especially for
OpenID adoption. The
final conclusion is that we should confer directly with key members of the
OpenID community (particulary library developers such as Sxip and JanRain)
before making a final decision. ---THE
OPENXRI PROJECT--- We
closed the day with an excellent discussion of next steps for the OpenXRI
Project (www.openxri.org), the community
open source reference implementation of an XRI resolver and server. Several TC
members are preparing to commit more resources to the project, both in
development and “bounties”, and Markus, Bill, and Steve all were
interested in joining Wil and Gabe in the actual development work. Bill in fact
adapted the project to use the Maven build system as the meeting progressed,
and announced that it was functional by the end of the day. Thanks Bill! Though
the OpenXRI Project is an independent open source effort separate from the
OASIS XRI TC, there will continue to be close collaboration between the two. In
particular we agreed that we wanted to complete OpenXRI implementation of the
XRI 2.x suite before advancing the specs into public review. ---XDI
TC CHARTER--- At
dinner on Thursday night, a subgroup of us discussed the proposed update to the
XDI TC charter. This update is listed on the wiki at: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/CharterRevision02 We
agreed that we need to proceed with this update as soon as possible, as our
current deliverable dates are 2+ years old. *****
FRIDAY, APRIL 20 ***** ---XRI
DICTIONARY 2.0--- Friday’s
main topic was the XRI Dictionary. Our first decision was to drop the term
“$” from the spec name, as it is not needed to provide the overall
context of the spec, and is easily misunderstood when taken out of context. ---XBNF
SECTION--- We
reviewed the overall structure of the Dictionary specification, which is
relatively straightforward. Each definition has six sections: *
Purpose *
XBNF Rules *
Normalization and Comparision Rules *
Resolution Rules *
Ordering Rules *
Examples We
discussed a suggestion from Marty that we consider separating out the XBNF into
a separate spec, since it takes up so much of the spec. #
DICTIONARY EDITORS (MARTY, LAURIE, AND DRUMMOND) to evaluate this suggestion. ---$DNS
and $IP--- In
discussion the previous day, Bill had suggested that we may not need to define
these entries because we could use RFC 4501 (http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4501.txt),
which already defines a DNS URI scheme. This
decision would be relatively easy if there was also a URI scheme for IP
addresses, but we were not able to easily locate one. #
DICTIONARY EDITORS to review this option. ---CLOSING--- We
closed the meeting at 1PM on Friday with a strong sense of momentum to finish
the XRI 2.x suite. We will continue with our weekly telecons until it is
complete. Note that there will NOT be a telecon on Thursday April 26 so spec
editors can continue their work; we will resume TC calls starting May 3. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]