[Nml-wg] [Nsi-wg] Suggestions for revised NML XSD schema

[John MacAuley]

Don't worry Jeroen.  Now that you have users there will be tons issues popping up that you can not take action on ;-)

On 2013-11-12, at 5:50 AM, Jeroen van der Ham <vdham at uva.nl> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Just to make it clear: I have been the editor of the NML base schema document and in that role flogged you all into action. That document is now published. Furthermore, I’ve taken a new job where I do not have much time to dedicate to this. So I will not be able to take action, or push others to take action.
> 
> That being said, I completely agree with the points below, and would welcome an update, errata, or addendum (whichever form is appropriate in the OGF context).
> 
> Jeroen.
> 
> On 7 Nov 2013, at 13:35, Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net> wrote:
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> It seems we need a rehash of NML XML schema for support NSI. Here are some
>> further suggestions for how to improve the schema. The changes should not
>> change the semantics of NML, but just make it easier to parse.
>> 
>> * Any element in PortGroup
>> 
>> This is the main problem. John already has a fix for this.
>> Should probably go through the NML schema and check that it is on everywhere.
>> 
>> * Bidirectional ports after unidirectional ports
>> 
>> In the current model a bidirectional port is composed of two unidirectional
>> ports. When building a datastructure representation, this means that one has
>> to construct a temporary value/object to track this mapping, as the data
>> structure representing the undirectional ports have not yet been created.
>> Having the bidirectional ports after the unidirectional removes this need,
>> making the parsing simpler.
>> 
>> * Replace nml:Relation
>> 
>> The nml:Relation constructs are not very "XML". I suggest that instead of
>> <nml:Relation type="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/05/base#hasInboundPort">
>> one would use:
>> <nml:InboundPorts>
>> Several elements would have to be constructed for this though.
>> 
>> * Identical List constructs
>> 
>> The way list of bidirectional ports and unidirectional ports are created are
>> different. Bidirectional ports are repeated in the topology element, where as
>> unidirectional ports are contained under an element. I.e:
>> 
>> <nml:Topology id=...>
>>   <nml:BidirectionalPort id=...>
>>       ...
>>   </nml:BidirectionalPort>
>>   <nml:BidirectionalPort id=...>
>>       ...
>>   </nml:BidirectionalPort>
>> 
>>   <nml:Relation type="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/05/base#hasInboundPort">
>>     <nml:PortGroup id=...>
>>         ...
>>     </nml:PortGroup>
>>     <nml:PortGroup id=...>
>>         ...
>>     </nml:PortGroup>
>>   </nml:Relation>
>> </nml:Topology>
>> 
>> There isn't really a wrong or right way to do this, but I think doing both is
>> the worst option. I understand that bidirectional ports are a somewhat special
>> things in NML, but they could still easily be contained in an element.
>> 
>> 
>>   Best regards, Henrik
>> 
>> Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net>
>> Software Developer, NORDUnet
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> nsi-wg mailing list
>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nsi-wg mailing list
> nsi-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg