[occi-wg] OCCI Categories and Types

[Ralf Nyren]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 07:23:35 +0200, Gary Mazz <garymazzaferro at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> 1) The use of multiple schemes and multiple attributes, permissible in
> headers may cause significant rendering and referential issues in the
> body.  I'm fairly confident most parsers will have problems with this
> approach.  If this scheme is also intended for a body, I'll create and
> example to examine the doms

I am not sure I understand, could you give a simple example perhaps?

> I think before we start producing examples using extensions, we should
> define the types of extension permitted and define where they are placed
> in the model scheme.

As far as I understand we have, depending how you see things, a single  
namespace for attributes. If we go with the latest proposal and say that a  
Category can define a set of attributes we indeed need a policy on how  
these names should be constructed.

Without to much thought put into this I would suggest a policy maybe like  
this:

<reverse_domain>.<category_term>.<attribute>

Any reverse domain starting with "occi" would be forbidden and only used  
be standard OCCI attributes.

Another alternative could be:

ext.<reverse_domain>.<category>.<attribute>

Example: Let's say a provider need a few extra attributes to describe a  
compute resource, in this case the desired boot priority.

GET /compute/vm01
Category: compute; scheme="http://schemas.ogf.org/occi/resource#";  
title="Compute Resource"
Category: compute; scheme="http://provider.com/occi/resource#";  
title="Vendor Compute Resource Extensions"
Attribute: occi.compute.memory="2.0"
Attribute: occi.compute.speed="3.8"
Attribute: com.provider.compute.boot_priority="harddisk,cdrom"

Would that make sense?

regards, Ralf