[occi-wg] Naming format for occi xsd file

[Gary Mazz]

Hi Costas,

I like that idea, but we are going to have to wait for an ok from the 
OGF.  We may want to consider placing words similar to "draft" or 
"experimental" somewhere in the top of the path, just to avoid any 
possible confusion.
@ David, Thanks for the spec.  Do you have a proposal for handling 
different target name spaces like RDF, RDFa, XML ? Has this topic come 
up before ?

cheers,
gary

Gary Mazz wrote:
> Snipping again. I'm trying to keep all the ideas on a single thread:
>
> Constantinos (Costas) Kotsokalis wrote:
>> Hi Gary,
>>
>> I think this is a well-put wrap-up of the discussion. There might 
>> also be a 3rd way: To use the current OGF year/month approach for 
>> official releases, and consider something like what I proposed for 
>> development (unofficial) releases. In this context, the "version" 
>> part would be the target release (i.e. where the standard is heading 
>> towards).
>>
>> Of course, the issue you brought up re: xsd namespaces for official 
>> releases would still apply. It may be reasonable to extend under the 
>> structure proposed by the OGF, with one additional level for this 
>> purpose. This should not affect the current setup of the OGF schemas 
>> location, unless I'm missing something.
>>
>> Disclaimer: I haven't gone through the document that David mentioned, 
>> yet.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>  Costas
>>
> Gary Mazz wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I Just snipped this from David Snelling's email to the list. He 
>> preempted my request for a pointer to the spec he sent out below.:)
>>
>> -g
>>
>> David Snelling wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> Also see http://www.ogf.org/documents/GFD.84.pdf for the OGF 
>>> document  describing how this all work.
>>>
>>>   
>>
>> Gary Mazz wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the replies.  They bring up two issues, the naming 
>>> convention, the intent of the initial email and a new topic, the 
>>> host name for the repository. I would like to discuss them 
>>> separately. I'll send out another email for the "host name" topic.
>>>
>>> From Andre's and Costas' replies, both recommends a date format. 
>>> Also, looking at the OCCI XML scheme for SLA at SOI, they use a date 
>>> encoding similar to the one described by Costas.
>>>
>>> From the current votes, the name space, the year and the month are 
>>> in common with Costas' proposal and the OFG's current scheme. I 
>>> guess the revision and sub revision are a nice artifacts to have in 
>>> terms of human understanding of the specification.
>>> Functionally, I do believe we will have schemes for multiple name 
>>> spaces, a new requirement the current OFG convention does not 
>>> currently address.
>>>
>>> Andre@ Would the OGF consider extending the naming policy for 
>>> schemes to include schema name spaces ?  Also, would the OGFconsider 
>>> modifying  the current  naming rules to  make them a little more 
>>> human friendly, as in Costas' proposal ?
>>> BTW, I searched for a OGF policy for naming schemes, I couldn't find 
>>> one. If anyone knows of one, I'd appreciate a pointer to it.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> gary
>>>
>>> Sam Johnston wrote:
>>>> Also note that thus far we've been using purl.org so as not to deter
>>>> external contributors.
>>>>
>>>> Sam
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, April 5, 2010, Andre Merzky <andre at merzky.net> wrote:
>>>>  
>>>>> Note that there is http://ogf.org/schemas/, which was created for
>>>>> exactly those purposes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best, Andre.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Quoting [Constantinos (Costas) Kotsokalis] (Apr 05 2010):
>>>>>  
>>>>>> Hi Gary,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://ogf.org/occi/[version]/[xsd namespace]/[yyyymmdd-c]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> where 'c' is an incremental revision counter that wraps each day? 
>>>>>> For
>>>>>> instance:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://ogf.org/occi/1.0/XML/20100405-2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first revision of Apr 06, 2010 would then end with 20100406-1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Costas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5 Apr 2010, at 06:54, Gary Mazz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm writing the xsd files for occi as well as the rdfs 
>>>>>>> definition. We
>>>>>>> will probably also end up with a number of xsd files, one for
>>>>>>> occi/xhtml5 another for xml or at the least, different versions of
>>>>>>> one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To keep the naming convention consistent,  we need to agree on a
>>>>>>> combining the occi name, occi version, xsd name space (XML, 
>>>>>>> RDFa, etc)
>>>>>>> and xsd version into a coherent naming rule.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Suggestions are welcome :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cheers,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> gary
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> occi-wg mailing list
>>>>>>> occi-wg at ogf.org
>>>>>>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
>>>>>>>         
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> occi-wg mailing list
>>>>>> occi-wg at ogf.org
>>>>>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
>>>>>>       
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Nothing is ever easy.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> occi-wg mailing list
>>>>> occi-wg at ogf.org
>>>>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
>>>>>
>>>>>     
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> occi-wg mailing list
>>>> occi-wg at ogf.org
>>>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>