[infod-wg] Chapters 1 and 2 of the Base Spec

[Dieter Gawlick]

Steve,

Sorry for the late response.

I agree with your statement :"The INFOD registry will ...'

As for the goals:

I agree that 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 8 are in and 6, 7, 9 are out.

I think 5 should be left in, see the car use case.

Let us discuss 10 at the next conference call - my perception in Athens 
was that we like to allow publishers and consumers to offer at least 
once or at most once notification/consumption respectively. Certainly 
there will be more options as we move on

11 should be re-formulated, we assume identity management and do 
complement it with the INFOD registry support.

As to 12. We actually support the use of multiple filters - see use 
cases; certainly the sophistication could be enhanced.

Dieter


Steve Fisher wrote:

>I have just gone through chapter 1. I note that it says:
>
>"The INFOD registry will only select those publishers to act on
>subscription who understand the vocabulary that is referenced in that
>subscription; the same applies to consumers."
>
>I just want to confirm that this is incorrect as the data vocabulary
>of the consumer is not necessarily known to the registry according to
>what we discussed last week.
>
>The next problem is the set of goals. The full set of requirements are
>set out with a note saying that #9 is not satisfied by the base
>spec. From my understanding we only satisfy 0-4 and 8 and I would
>propose to renumber 8 as 5 and drop 5-7and 9-12 from the base spec.
>
>This is rather fundamental to our understanding of the spec. If anyone
>thinks that I am throwing out too much I am happy to argue requirement
>by requirement.
>
>Have I got it wrong?
>
>Steve
>
>
>  
>