[occi-wg] Namespaces & Extensibility

[Christopher Smith]

There was an OGF community practice document published on namespaces that is
probably relevant here. I would suggest following it¹s convention.

³Standardised Namespaces for XML infosets in OGF
³ (http://www.ogf.org/documents/GFD.84.pdf).

-- Chris


On 18/1/10 13:54 , "Alexander Papaspyrou"
<alexander.papaspyrou at tu-dortmund.de> wrote:

> Sam,
> 
> w.r.t Tim Bray's comment "Do it like Java", occi.<whatever> seems perfectly
> sensible to me.
> 
> Another option would be to take org.ogf.occi.<whatever>, since OGF is the
> standardizing OCCI anyway and the ogf.org <http://ogf.org>  domain---including
> subdomains---is under control of the OGF corporation.
> 
> -Alexander
> 
> Am 18.01.2010 um 21:55 schrieb Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net>:
> 
>> Afternoon all,
>> 
>> So one of the things we need[ed] to resolve was how to sensibly handle
>> extensibility and the most sensible approach we've been able to come up with
>> so far is one based on domain names. This leaves someone else to take care of
>> splitting up the global namespace so we don't have to run our own registry,
>> or worse, just hope for the best). For XML this typically means using
>> URI-based schemes like http://purl.org/occi/thing#thong
>> <http://purl.org/occi/thing#thong> , and while this works for machines it's
>> inconvenient for us humans. They also carry a lot of fluff in terms of the
>> URI scheme (http) and delimiters ([:/#.]).
>> 
>> The current approach from the spec is "Attributes defined by this standard
>> reside under the occi namespace (e.g. "occi.abc") but anyone can define a new
>> attribute by allocating a unique namespace based on their reversed Internet
>> domain (e.g. ³com.cisco.cdp²)." but we could potentially drop the "occi"
>> namespace (and be careful to avoid stepping on current and future TLDs), or
>> better yet, set a good example by choosing a sensible domain name (ideally
>> occi.org <http://occi.org>  <http://occi.org>  but that's not available). The
>> current domain (occi-wg.org <http://occi-wg.org>  <http://occi-wg.org> ) is
>> not only fugly but refers to this working group rather than the spec itself.
>> 
>> The reason I'm raising this (more as an FYI than anything else) is because
>> Tim Bray's just done a nice post "On Namespaces
>> <http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2010/01/17/Extensible-JSON> " in
>> which he suggests to "Do It Like Java" - and that's exactly what we've done,
>> and it's what the Sun Cloud API has done too.
>> 
>> Sam
>> 
>> PS If anyone does have a suggestion for a sensible domain - or even a more
>> sensible name for the standard (which is a protocol moreso than an interface
>> at this time anyway) then we're all ears.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/attachments/20100118/e2c4f7d6/attachment.html