[jsdl-wg] my view on execution user and group

[Michel Drescher]

Ian,

You're preaching to the converted here. :^)

Since JSDL is not the only specification embedded within OGSA and GGF, 
we've to be aware of what's decided within GGF.

Currently, we're in the middle of unifying the namespaces used at GGF, 
and how to embed them in a larger scope than only JSDL.

Cheers,
Michel

On 4 Apr 2005, at 14:49, Ian Stokes-Rees wrote:
> Namespace are confusing, period.  I have worked with XML for several 
> years and still find it difficult to get my head around all the rules 
> for scoping, schema declarations, default NSs, null NS, chameleon NSs, 
> attribute vs. element NSs, etc.
>
> My reading of xml-dev general-opinion and (the xsdl-dev mailing list 
> when I used to read it) is that everyone agrees it was a mistake to 
> use "http://..." for something which *looks* like a URL but, in fact, 
> is just a URI and does not (nor perhaps ever will) actually resolve.  
> It is ashame that this has not been embded in the XSDL Schema primer 
> and has been widely adopted.
>
> My very strong recommendation would be (in this order):
>
> 1. Definitely do not put ".xsd" at the end of the NS.  That 100% looks 
> like you are giving a NS with a one-to-one mapping to a resolvable URL 
> to the schema for that namespace.
>
> 2. Do not put "http://" at the start.  Use "uri:" or "urn:" instead.
>
> 3. If you do you "http://" or "*.xsd" then make sure it *does* resolve 
> to something, probably to the "master" or "top-level" schema file.
>
> A not-altogether-bad approach might be to have (for example)
>
> urn:www.ggf.org/schemas/jsdl/2005/04
>
> and then convince someone that the URL:
>
> http://www.ggf.org/schemas/jsdl/2005/04/
>
> should provide some information about where to actually find the 
> various XSD files (by set, by version, etc.) -- perhaps at:
>
> http://www.ggf.org/schemas/jsdl/2005/04/jsdl-2005-04.xsd
>
> (yes, I know, for redundant see redundant, but it means if the file is 
> copied locally it still has a sensible name).
>
> Anyway, just my thoughts on this.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ian.
>
> -- 
> Ian Stokes-Rees                 i.stokes-rees at physics.ox.ac.uk
> Particle Physics, Oxford        http://www-pnp.physics.ox.ac.uk/~stokes