[occi-wg] Voting result

Fri May 8 12:35:58 CDT 2009

Richard,
	Thanks for the summary.

	a)	As a JSON proponent, agree on your observation that we
should do JSON rendering on it's own right. If you guys take the lead,
would be happy to pitch-in, (as much as time allows of course).
	b)	I support the single format than multi.

Cheers
<k/>

|-----Original Message-----
|From: occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On
Behalf
|Of Richard Davies
|Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 8:42 AM
|To: occi-wg at ogf.org
|Subject: Re: [occi-wg] Voting result
|
|The list has thankfully gone quiet, so I've recounted the votes since
my
|previous post. We are now at:
|
|  10 JSON, 5 XML, 2 TXT
|
|I don't consider this as a vote for a decision, but do think it has
|drawn
|out a lot of opinions and shown the lay of the land more clearly - in
|the
|light of the votes, the only two viable options are:
|
|- Single-format: JSON
|- Multi-format: JSON + XML + ?TXT
|
|The list has also been fairly evenly split on whether multiple format
|support makes sense or not (independent of the choice of the single
|format).
|
|
|I see three conclusions going forward:
|
|1) Continue our specification in terms of the model (nouns, verbs,
|attributes, semantics of these, how these are linked together) with
both
|JSON and XML renderings of this being explored on the wiki. We can
|decide
|later if we run with both or just JSON.
|
|There is still work here - e.g. verbs and attributes on networks have
|not
|been specified, nor have we agreed fully the _model_ of how we link
|servers
|to storage and networks.
|
|Thanks to Alexander Papaspyrou, Andy Edmonds:
|http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000461.html
|http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000444.html
|
|
|2) The JSON vs. XML debate is not just about angle-brackets vs.
|curly-brackets.
|
|Amongst the XML supporters, I have seen little opposition to a
|GData/Atom
|meta-model around the nouns/verbs/attributes. [Tim Bray, who co-chaired
|the
|IETF Atom working group, felt it was the wrong choice, but then he
|doesn't
|support using XML at all in this context]
|
|However, many(/all?) of the JSON supporters seem to want a lighter
|meta-model around the nouns/verbs/attributes. For instance, they would
|probably prefer fixed actuator URLs to passing these in the feed, and
|would
|likely transmit flatter hashes of noun attributes rather than following
|Atom
|conventions the structure of links, attributes, etc. within an object.
|
|Thanks to Ben Black, Andy Edmonds:
|http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000395.html
|http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000420.html
|
|My conclusion from this is that we should not develop the JSON
rendering
|in
|terms of an XSLT transform from the XML rendering, and should not go
for
|"GData-JSON". We will need these automatic transforms eventually, but
we
|should develop the JSON rendering in its own right, thinking about what
|works well for JSON, and then later work out how we'll auto transform
|back
|and forth.
|
|Do the 10 JSON supporters agree with this, or have I misjudged it and
|there
|is actually strong support for GData-JSON?
|
|Myself and Chris would be happy to lead developing the JSON rendering
it
|its
|own right if people agree with my statements above and hence that it
|does
|need independent development (from the same set of
nouns/verb/attributes
|and
|semantics).
|
|
|3) I suggest we(/I!) stop discussing TXT for now. If we go multi-format
|then
|we should probably have it, but Chris has demonstrated how it can be
|trivially transformed back and forth from JSON.
|
|http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000451.html
|
|
|Cheers,
|
|Richard.
|
|==========================================
|
|JSON: 10
|- Alexis Richardson http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000405.html
|- Andy Edmonds
http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000420.html
|- Ben Black http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000395.html
|- Krishna Sankar http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000455.html
|- Mark Masterson http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000440.html
|- Michael Richardson (private mail to me)
|- Randy Bias? (JSON listed first at
|http://wiki.gogrid.com/wiki/index.php/API:Anatomy_of_a_GoGrid_API_Call)
|- Richard Davies http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000409.html (split EH vote)
|- Tino Vazquez? http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000411.html
|- Tim Bray http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000418.html
|
|XML: 5
|- Chuck W http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000448.html
|- Gary Mazz http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000470.html
|- Kristoffer Sheather http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000430.html
|- Sam Johnston
http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000381.html
|- William Vambenepe http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000396.html
|
|TXT: 2
|- Andre Merzky
http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000447.html
|- Chris Webb http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000409.html
|(split EH vote)
|
|Single: 3
|- Benjamin Black http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000457.html
|- Tim Bray http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000418.html
|- Richard Davies (revised in light of Tim Bray's comments)
|
|Multi: 3
|- Gary Mazz http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000458.html
|- Marc-Elian Begin http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-
|May/000439.html
|- Sam Johnston
http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/2009-May/000445.html
|_______________________________________________
|occi-wg mailing list
|occi-wg at ogf.org
|http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg