[occi-wg] Consolidated list of editorial changes from issues list

Thijs Metsch Thijs.Metsch at Sun.COM
Thu Oct 8 14:43:26 CDT 2009


Hi all,

Find a fresh draft attached. reflecting changeset 55...

Cheers,

-Thijs

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 08:37 -0600, Gary Mazz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is a consolidated list of editorial changes originated in the 0cci issues list found on http://code.google.com/p/occi/issues/list
> 
> This list is to act as a guide for occi-wg editors writing the occi specification.
> 
> This list attempts to place the recommendations in sequence in the document.
> 
> cheers,
> gary
> 
> ================================================================================
> Section: Overall
> 
> ***Comment:*
> 
>   - move table of contents after abstract
> 
>   - use MUST, SHOULD, MAY, CAN...  should be uppercase
> 
>   - "Each implementation has a single OCCI end-point URL"
>     should be 'each deployment' or 'each service'?
> 
>   - TIP, WARNING: are they normative?   Like, the tip after Par. 54
>     contains a SHOULD.  But I am asking about tips in general, not
>     about this particular one.
> 
>   - "A simple peer review process is available for extending the 
>     registries"
>     That process is not described, not referenced.
> 
>   - "This scalable approach..."  
>     not relevant, really - can go into footnote
> 
> 
> Section: Document-wide
> 
>   1. The character set use in communications should be specified
> 
>   2. Header Capitalisation of "OCCI working group" -> "OCCI Working Group"
> 
>   4. Lacking/Inconsistent normatives throughout
> 
>   5. What is the minimum set of requirements/features (a profile) that
> needs to be implemented so that one is OCCI compliant?
> 
>   6. Format of references - should be enclosed by '[' and ']' e.g. [REF22 <http://code.google.com/p/occi/source/detail?r=EF22>]
> 
>   7. Use appropriate page breaks
> 
>   8. Revise use of round bracketing
> 
>   9. Ensure consistency of dot or dash attribute notation in all examples
> 
>   10. There is no consideration in the spec for the states that a resource
> can have
> 
>   11. All extensions should be placed and grouped under a Section named
> "Extensions"
> 
>   12. Aspects of security are dealt with in 3.3.1 and 3.7. It would be
> better for these to be placed together for context and ease of reading.
> 
>   13. For numerical attributes it might be useful to state their numerical
> base e.g. if these should be Base-2 or Base-10.
> 
>   14. Would be useful to introduce the notion of OCCI extensions in the
> walk through.
> 
> ====================================================================================
> 
> 
> Section: abstract
> 
> *Paragraph:*
> 
> Comment: first sentence should move to --> status; 'note' in walkthrough is
> misleading...
> 
> 
> =====================================================================================
> Section: OCCI Core
> Pages: 5-14
> 
> 41. P13 "Collection" link relation
>     1. Is a self-referiental reference appropriate?
> 
>   1. Paragraph 26 "A "Resource Oriented Architecture (ROA)""
>       * Supply reference
> 
> 
>   2. P26 "Each resource (identified by a canonical URL)"
>     1. Bracket usage - suggestion "Each resource, identified by a canonical
> URL,
> 
>   3. P26 "has zero or more representations"
>     1. If a resource has no representation then to all intents it does not
> exist within the system. Suggest "1 or more"
> 
>   4. P26 "Metadata including associations between resources is exposed via
> HTTP headers (e.g. the Link: header), except in the case of collections
> where Atom is used as the meta- model."
>     1. Which is normative? Are there other ways?
> 
>   5. P26 Comment
>     1. Is the supplied tip of relevance in the context? If so give an
> example to explain.
> 
>   6. P27 "The interface"
>     1. What interface? Also the interface is defined in _part_ by the URL -
> consider rephrasing this paragraph
> 
>   7. P27 "in-band/out-of-band"
>     1. Easier to supply a definition of this here and then later in the doc
> refer to the definition in glossary. Better way to introduce the concept to
> "newbies".
> 
>   8. P28 "HATEOAS"
>     1. Expand the acronynm
> 
>   9. P29 "WebDAV definitions are used for MOVE and COPY"
>     1. COPY is a valid operation on the external interface of an
> infrastructure provider. MOVE however is not and something that might be
> implemented optionally. Suggest to have MOVE as an extension and not part
> of core. Motivation not obvious to have in core.
> 
>   10. P29 Comment
>     1. I can PUT to create and POST to update - would be worth explaining
> which to use (normative)
> 
>   11. P29 "DELETE" - "and everything "under" it"
>     1. Better worded as "and all it's child resources" Lars pointed this
> out also
> 
>   12. Section 3.3.1 Authentication
>     1. Needs to be extensible and adaptable - might consider it part of
> OCCI extensions also? E.g. SAML support
> 
>   13. P33 Comment
>     1. An example should be given
> 
>   14. P34 Comment
>     1. Ever seen a working model that did not include links between entities?
> 
>   15. P34 "without regard to how they interrelate."
>     1. Surely this should be "with regard to how they interrelate." Both
> meta-model and model define links in general
> 
>   16. P34 "the objects"
>     1. change to "infrastructure resources (objects)"
> 
>   17. P36 "http://purl.org/occi/kind/ namespace"
>     1. Who controls this?
> 
>   18. P36 Comment - "Warning"
>     1. These are repeated through out - rather than warn, insert a section
> on how to extend the specification including a note on this warning, how
> the peer process works etc. Then refer to the section from various parts of
> the doc
> 
>   19. P37 "Internet media types"
>     1. Better to call this "Internet MIME types"?
> 
>   20. P39 "dash character (“-”)"
>     1. Why the dash over the dot? Where's the motivation, reason is a
> little unclear. If all representations are UTF8 compliant then should this
> matter?
> 
>   21. P40 Warning is repeated
>     1. Repeated: Use a dedicated section on extending OCCI and ref to it
> 
>   22. Table 1 "Common Attributes"
>     1. "OCCI-Updated" - is the HTTP "Last-Modified" header sufficient?
>     2. Normative - are all these to be supported?
> 
>   23. P43 Comment
>     1. It is noted that a list of actions are available - where? There's
> none in the spec doc
> 
>   24. P34 Warning
>     1. Repeated: Use a dedicated section on extending OCCI and ref to it
> 
>   25. P44 "An action is triggered via an HTTP POST"
>     1. Normative and possibly give the reason as to why POST is used.
> 
>   26. P46 Tip
>     1. Usefulness of this in the context?
> 
>   27. P47 Tip
>     1. Usefulness of this in the context?
> 
>   28. P48 "The meta-model defines how objects interrelate."
>     1. Not a normative definition. Some include: http://bit.ly/gwCA5
> Consider revising.
> 
>   29. Section 3.5.1
>     1. What happened to the useful OCCI-text examples of categories?
> 
>   30. P51 Tip
>     1. More than just a tip. This is a feature (tagging via categories)
> that Atom gives for free. Suggest making it a paragraph.
> 
>   32. P53 Tip "O(n+1)"
>     1. Should this not be O(n^2)? - for every resource rendering (1
> operation) there is the rendering of its details (1 operation). Therefore
> in a list of 4 resources we have to perform a constant 2 operations per
> resource, hence n^2 operations.
> 
>   33. P55 Comment on examples
>     1. Should the example show the encoded ';' character?
> 
>   34. Section 3.5.3
>     1. What happened to the useful OCCI-text examples of linking?
> 
>   35. Table 2
>     1. What are the normative?
>     2. "help" - appropriate and useful in core section?
>     3. "icon" - appropriate and useful in core section?
> 
>   36. P58 "public peer review"
>     1. Point to an extension section detailing this process
> 
>   37. Section 3.6.1 Comment
>     1. Explain what "foreign markup" is
> 
>   38. P59 Comment
>     1. Example needed
> 
>   39. Section 3.8 "Registration" Comment
>     1. Place in an appendix
> 
> 
> Page 10, paragraph 52
> 
> "Where an operation returns multiple resources ..." to be replaced with
> "Where an operation COULD return multiple resources..."
> 
> to make it clear that a collection is always returned, even if there is a
> single result.
> 
> ==========================================================================================
> Infrastructure:
> 
>   1. Table 3
>     1. Suggest to move it after introducing kinds - better logical flow
> 
> 
>   2. P77 "Cloud infrastructure can be modeled using three primary kinds:
> compute, network and storage."
>     1. Rephrase to: "Cloud infrastructure can be modeled using the
> following three primary kinds:"
> 
>   3. Table 4 "Recorded information resources"
>     1. reword to "Information recording resources"
> 
>   4. Table 5
>     1. Suggest to include boot volume attribute (Richard)
>     2. "Enum (standard, checksum)" -> "Enum (none, checksum)"
>     3. How to extend enumerations? Should we just use text field instead?
> 
>   5. Section 8.1.2 Comment
>     1. These are mostly network client attributes. Are they sufficient to
> model a pool of static IPs?
> 
>   6. Table 6
>     1. OCCI-Network-Address - unclear description - is it a gateway IP or
> node IP address?
>     2. OCCI-Network-Allocation - how is manual allocation performed, by who?
> 
>   1. Section 9
>     1. What is the relevance of the date?
> 
>   2. P83 OpenSearch
>     1. Give example for context/relevance
> 
>   4. Section 10 "OCCI Status Extension"
>     1. Better named as "OCCI Task Reporting", especially as there's the
> "OCCI Tasks Extension"?
>     2. Isn't this extension just a specialisation of Monitoring (Lars noted
> this too) and should be reflected as such?
>     3. Very much related to the "OCCI Task Extension" - is it better combined?
>     4. An example of the extensions usage would be helpful
> 
>   5. Table 8
>     1. Uses dot notation for attribute naming - consistency
>   
>   7. Section 11
>     1. What is the relevance of the date?
>     2. An example of the extensions usage would be helpful
> 
>   8. Table 9
>     1. Uses dot notation for attribute naming - consistency
> 
>   10. Section 12 "OCCI Registries"
>     1. What are the normative HTTP status codes?
> 
>   11. Table 11
>     1. We should also mention mailing list contributors as this IS a
> community effort and not just that of a few.
> 
> ==============================================================================
>  7. Bibliography
>     1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document
>   40. Page 13 Bibliography
>     1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document
>  
>   3. Section 9 Bibliography
>     1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document
>     2. What is the relevance of the date?
>   6. Section 10 Bibliography
>     1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document
>   9. Section 11 Bibliography
>     1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> occi-wg mailing list
> occi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg


-- 
Thijs Metsch                        Tel: +49 (0)941 3075-122 (x60122)
http://blogs.sun.com/intheclouds
http://www.twitter.com/befreax
Software Engineer Cloud, Grid and Virtualization
Sun Microsystems GmbH
Dr.-Leo-Ritter-Str. 7               mailto:thijs.metsch at sun.com
D-93049 Regensburg                  http://www.sun.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: occi-specification.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 84542 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/attachments/20091008/8ebd686a/attachment.pdf 


More information about the occi-wg mailing list