I don’t think we need to. Just use a Property with type
attribute and no value.
EHL
From: drummond.reed@gmail.com
[mailto:drummond.reed@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Drummond Reed
Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 1:05 PM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: Nika Jones; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [xri] <Type>
Yes, I can see a pretty good case to go from <Type> to
<Property type="uri-goes-here">value-if-
not-empty</Property>.
Note that if we do this, all we need to do to replace the original semantics of
the <Type> element is to define a Property type URI with that semantics,
e.g., something like
http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri#type.
The value of a property with that type URI would be a URI representing the type
of the resource.
=Drummond
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> wrote:
I am not sure about the 'required' attribute. Given the lack
of actual use cases for it (since OAuth is more likely at this point to be
profiled down than need full configuration document), if we make this change, I
would suggest we drop it (unless someone has a current use for it).
As for the element structure, it is nothing more than a key/value pair where
the key is a URI. If you need multiple properties, define multiple URIs, not
one URI with multiple XML attributes on the same Property element.
EHL
> I can see re-naming the
Type element as Property. That could make
> things
> clearer as to what it's doing. I have a few questions.
>
> 1. Does the "required" attribute then go away?
> 2. Does this become a URL-Template type of thing... as we start making
> parts of the URL "configurable"?
>
> Or can what you proposed (the splitting of the url) be moved into an
> XML
> namespace example:
>
> <Property xmlns:hs="http://example.com" hs:version="1.1"
> hs:size="300,400" required="true" />
>
>
> Nika
>
> > I have been thinking about James' feedback regarding the need for
> > key/value pairs to describe resources, and I have been convinced that
> it
> > makes more sense than the current Boolean approach taken with
<Type>.
> >
> > Right now, we can describe a resource using only a list of
"tags".
> While
> > protocols can customize these to include configuration:
> >
> > <Type>http://example.com/version/1.1</Type>
> > <Type>http://example.com/version/2.0</Type>
> >
> > Or
> >
> > <Type>http://example.com/popup/size/300,400</Type>
> >
> > This approach has been rejected by most members a few months back as
> a bad
> > extensibility model.
> >
> > To make XRD useful we should either drop <Type> and leave it up
to
> > individual extensions to define a container that is useful for them
> to
> > describe the resource, or replace <Type> with a key/value
element
> such as:
> >
> > <Property key="http://example.com/version">1.1</Property>
> >
> > Ignore the element syntax, use of value or attributes or child
> elements.
> > The key will be a URI (just like <Type>) and the value a
string. A
> key
> > without value is the same as a <Type> declaration.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > EHL
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS
at:
> > https://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
|