My main concern with use of a version identifier in the namespace URI is
that it
will be abused or worse, that there will be a tendancy to change it to
correspond with
the version of the spec/standard which is something with which I have a
fundamental
disagreement.
Cheers,
Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email:
blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
phone: +1 508 377 9295
"Gilbert Pilz" <> wrote on 07/14/2005 01:38:18 PM:
> Peter,
>
> You and Chris seem to be in agreement on the basic form of the URLs. The
> only thing you don't seem to agree on is the form of the version
> information. Chris indicated to the editors earlier that he preferred to
> use a date stamp to indicate version. You'll have to ask him about his
> reasons for this preference. I don't care one way or another.
>
> I think its important, though, that we create an AI to talk to whomever
> is responsible for the OASIS site and make sure that they are willing
> and able to create documents that correspond to the URLs that we are
> proposing.
>
> Also, I am still working on the "XML Namespace URI Versioning Policy"
> issue. I'll send it to the list when I get the proposal worked out.
>
> - g
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Niblett [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 5:26 AM
> To: Gilbert Pilz
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: XML Namespace URIs
>
> In the WS-Notification and WS-Resource Framework specifications we have
> adopted a more concise version of the URIs. This was to avoid bloat of
> things that embed the uri, like wsa:Action MAPs. We also chose to omit
> the date, and instead append a version number that increments if and
> when the namespace changes incompatibility (I know this is an area where
> there can be much debate).
>
> Also the current draft of the naming guidelines states that URLs SHOULD
> be rooted at the docs domain, and the tcShortName MUST be the next node
> in the URL after the base.
>
> Have you considered using the WSN / WSRF convention? It would mean that
> the namespace URIs would be
>
>
>
> xmlns:wsrm="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrx/rm-1"
>
>
> xmlns:wsrmp="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrx/rmp-1"
>
>
>
>
> Peter Niblett
> WS-Notification TC co-chair
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Gilbert Pilz"
>
> <Gilbert.Pilz@bea
>
> .com>
> To
> <>
>
> 14/07/2005 05:24
> cc
>
>
>
> Subject
> [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: XML Namespace
>
> URIs
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Title: XML Namespace URIs
>
>
> Description: We need to decide upon the normative XML namespace URIs
> that must be used by implementations of these specifications.
>
>
> Justification: Self-evident.
>
>
> Target: all
>
>
> Type: editorial
>
>
> Proposal: The namespace URIs for WS-RX-defined schemas should be URLs
> that resolve to RDDL documents that provide information about the schema
> as well as links to the corresponding specification(s). Per OASIS
> guidelines, the RDDL documents must be hosted by OASIS. Therefore the
> exact URL values will need to be co-ordinated with OASIS but, in
> general, they should look something like the following:
>
>
>
> xmlns:wsrm="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ws-rx/wsreliablemessagi
> ng-200507.html
> "
>
>
>
> xmlns:wsrmp="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ws-rx/wsrmpolicy-20050
> 7.html"
>
>
> Note that the "200507" in the URL is represents the schema version as a
> date (July, 2005).
>
>
