atom feed18 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.xri-editorsRE: [xri-editors] further thinking on...
FromSent OnAttachments
Dave McAlpinFeb 4, 2005 11:19 am 
Peter C DavisFeb 4, 2005 11:39 am 
Dave McAlpinFeb 4, 2005 11:43 am 
Peter C DavisFeb 4, 2005 11:52 am 
Dave McAlpinFeb 4, 2005 11:59 am 
Drummond ReedFeb 4, 2005 3:32 pm 
Wachob, GabeFeb 6, 2005 2:23 pm 
Dave McAlpinFeb 7, 2005 10:56 am 
Peter C DavisFeb 7, 2005 11:28 am 
Drummond ReedFeb 7, 2005 2:47 pm 
Wachob, GabeFeb 7, 2005 7:07 pm 
Dave McAlpinFeb 7, 2005 7:22 pm 
Drummond ReedFeb 7, 2005 7:51 pm 
Peter C DavisFeb 8, 2005 5:45 am 
Wachob, GabeFeb 8, 2005 10:01 am 
Drummond ReedFeb 9, 2005 9:20 am 
Wachob, GabeFeb 11, 2005 3:01 pm 
Dave McAlpinFeb 11, 2005 3:03 pm 
Subject:RE: [xri-editors] further thinking on mustUnderstand
From:Drummond Reed (drum@cordance.net)
Date:Feb 7, 2005 7:51:33 pm
List:org.oasis-open.lists.xri-editors

Thanks. With the combined clarifications, I'm on board.

=Drummond

-----Original Message----- From: Dave McAlpin [mailto:Dave@epok.net] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 7:21 PM To: Wachob, Gabe; Drummond Reed; Peter C Davis Cc: xri-@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xri-editors] further thinking on mustUnderstand

One other advantage of this approach is that the only place it doesn't work is on immediate children of XRID, where mustUnderstand semantics are almost always inappropriate and most easily misused.

Dave

-----Original Message----- From: Wachob, Gabe [mailto:gwac@visa.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 5:07 AM To: Drummond Reed; Peter C Davis; Dave McAlpin Cc: xri-@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xri-editors] further thinking on mustUnderstand

#3 means we don't specify anything.

I just proposed one way that a extension author could write their extension if we didn't do mustUnderstand. There are other reasoanable ways too, I suppose.

So, the short answer for your first question: we don't *enforce* the solution since there is no problem, currently.

For your second question: This is better since we don't have to say anything about mustUnderstand semantics - we just have mustIgnore semantics. My proposal was just one way of simulating mustUnderstand in a mustIgnore-only environment.

Third: we don't have to explain this solution since we don't require it and it doesn't have to be normative. We can simply put this issue to rest and not even discuss mustUnderstand at all. We can simply say "all unknown elements must be ignored"...

-Gabe

-----Original Message----- From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drum@cordance.net] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 2:48 PM To: 'Peter C Davis'; 'Dave McAlpin' Cc: Wachob, Gabe; xri-@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xri-editors] further thinking on mustUnderstand

I hate to be dumb, but how do we enforce such a proposal? Is the only extension point then the XRIDescriptor element? Or do we just do it with normative text?

Secondly, why is this better than the original situation of just having a global Must Ignore rule that any XRI resolver that doesn't understand an extension must ignore it?

Lastly, is there clear precedence for this approach, that we can point to so we don't have to spend a bunch of energy and text explaining our decision?

Feel free to ring me to discuss if this is too much to go over in text.

=Drummond

-----Original Message----- From: Peter C Davis [mailto:pete@neustar.biz] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 11:29 AM To: Dave McAlpin Cc: Wachob, Gabe; Drummond Reed; xri-@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [xri-editors] further thinking on mustUnderstand

On Monday 07 February 2005 01:56 pm, Dave McAlpin wrote:

After discussing this internally, I'm supporting Gabe's option 3. It accomplishes what we're looking for while avoiding the problem of inappropriate MustUnderstand attributes on immediate children of XRID. It also has the nice effect of leaving the current schema intact. Can we agree to close this issue?

I am fine wrt option 3 as gabe described below i suppose...

--- peterd

3) We don't use mustUnderstand at all. We can actually get the same effect of mustUnderstand by requiring extensions to "wrap" other elements. So, for the example above:

<XRIDescriptor> <other:SuperAuthority> <Authority> ... <other:ExtensionElement>...</other:ExtensionElement> </Authority> </other:SuperAuthority> <Service> ... </Service> </XRIDescriptors>

This would have the same effect, using *only* a mustIgnore rule, as the #1 option. It may make the combining of extension elements quite complicated.

To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xri-editors/membe rs/leave_workgroup.php.

-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.302 / Virus Database: 265.8.6 - Release Date: 2/7/2005