[ogsa-naming-wg] New Version of OGSA Naming

[Andreas Savva]

[I sent this a few weeks ago but it looks like it never made it to the
list.]

I had a glance through this document and I like the idea of providing
separate compliance URIs per (sub-)profile.

A few minor comments:

Section 2.2 states "The conformance claim URI for this Profile as a
whole...."  Emphasizing the "as a whole" for the moment, if a service
exposes this claim does it mean that it (implicitly) exposes all
sub-profile claims defined in this document? Or does it mean that it
must also expose other relevant claim URIs in addition to this URI?

Section 6 says
"INSTANCES conforming to the Web Service Endpoint Address Identifier
Profile MUST conform to the Unambiguous Web Service Endpoint Profile."

but the Unambiguous Web Service Endpoint Profile is already mandatory
for anyone claiming conformance to the WS-Naming profile. So shouldn't
this be

"INSTANCES conforming to WS-Naming MAY conform to the Web Service
Endpoint Address Identifier Profile."

Should section 6 also have a statement that if one conforms to it they
do not have to (should not?) conform to section 4?

Section 5 is missing a conformance statement.

Andreas

David Snelling wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> Sorry for the large posting. The OGSA-Naming site is not allowing me to
> post - maybe I just need to sign up as a GF member.
> 
> Joel, Can you post both these documents in "Documents > Root Folder >
> Current Drafts"?
> 
> What I have done:
> 
> 1) Accepted all previous changes.
> 
> 2) Rewrote major sections (lots of out of date stuff about WS-Addressing
> being pre standard etc.)
> 
> 3) Reorganized the sections around the 4 specs outlined in the use cases
> document,
> 
> 4) Added the missing sections that were my action items.
> 
> 5) Separated normative and non-normative parts of each section, see
> subsections "Non Normative Discussion". These sections could probably be
> extended.
> 
> 6) I removed the SOAP message examples. These could go back in an
> appendix, but they would be non normative (I don't like having too much
> of this is a spec) and I wanted to get this out sooner.
> 
> 7) Asked Michel Drescher to do a new set of schema and WSDL.
> 
> There are two documents attached:
> 
> 1) draft-ws-naming-August-2006-1-ct.doc: This has all my changes
> tracked. This is provided for process reasons. I really expect folks top
> start with the clean copy.
> 
> 2) draft-ws-naming-August-2006-1.doc: I have accepted all my own
> changes, since it is virtually a new document. People should start with
> this, and use the above to identify things they thought were there and
> went away.
> 
> Enjoy!


-- 
Andreas Savva
Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd