Re: How could RDDL be distributed ?

[Michael Mealling <michael@bailey.dscga.com>]

On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 12:00:54PM +0100, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> We can probably learn from recent experiences to give a hint on how this
> could be achieved and I'd suggest that we give the possibility to define
> alternative locations at the 3 places where it seems possible to do so
> (by order of precedence):
> 
> 1) Like it's specified by W3C XML Schema, and like it's the case with
> XSLT, the APIs should allow to define alternative locations for the RDDL
> documents.
> 
> 2) Still like it's the case for W3C XML Schema or XSLT, it should be
> possible to define alternative locations in the instance documents.
> 
> 3) It should be possible to define alternate locations in the RDDL
> documents themselves. 
> 
> Another alternative would be to rely exclusively on the protocol caching
> facilities, but I think that they are currently used in a too randomly
> fashion to be considered as reliable.

The solution I've been suggesting for a while is using the URI Resolution
process (draft-ietf-urn-uri-res-ddds-02.txt) to find a server that can send 
you information (RDDL in this case) about the URI in question. It still 
leaves it up to the various XML standards to decide on how to talk about 
the 'name' of a thing as well as a current 'location' of a thing. As 
mentioned earlier the actual RDDL (or chunks of it) would be retrieved 
by something like the RESCAP protocol mentioned yesterday...

-MM

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  michaelm@netsol.com