[jsdl-wg] Activity schema requirements

[Donal K. Fellows]

Steven Newhouse wrote:
> While it was not my intention to cause 'trouble' some of the
> responses to me seem to indicate very different
> architectures/implementations.

I don't currently have any specific architecture or implementation in
mind. On this topic, I'm closer to being in the peanut gallery than
usual. :-)

> I think you need to firm up your models as to how you expect this
> activity schema to be stored, represented and accessed.

I suppose I'm currently thinking that, for a generalized Activity,
there'll be information originating in a whole range of services and
resources, and that there will be some model of aggregation. The info
that represents the current state will be "out of date" (and so perhaps
ought to be tagged with EPRs of services where you can go and ask for
the most up-to-date version?[*]) but the historical info will
(eventually) be accurate. Given that we're aggregating, we have to have
a common structure/organization for how to gather the disparate
subdocuments together. Which I think is the focus of what we're doing
here, yes?

Donal.
[* I only just thought of this now; the idea's not been subject to any
    kind of deep thought, analysis or in-service testing! ]