[ogsa-wg] OGSA/OGF URI for non-bound or non-functional EPRs

[Dave Berry]

In ther OGSA Data Architecture document we suggest that URI's are needed
to name transport protocols, access interfaces, and query languages.  I
would be surprised if this list were exhaustive.

ByteIO, of course, have made a start on naming SOAP transport protocols
(SwA, MTOM and DIME).

Dave.



-----Original Message-----
From: ogsa-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf
Of Andre Merzky
Sent: 30 August 2007 12:01
To: Michel Drescher
Cc: OGSA-DMI ML; OGSA-WG
Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] OGSA/OGF URI for non-bound or non-functional EPRs


Hi Michel, 

Quoting [Michel Drescher] (Aug 30 2007):
> 
> Folks,
> 
> - apologies for cross-posting -
> 
> [...]
> 
> Also, while we were discussing this matter on the last DMI call, we 
> came up with the idea whether it is feasible to pull together a couple

> of interested people and create an OGF Community Practice document 
> that may be based on
> GFD.84: "Standardised Namespaces for XML infosets in OGF"
> (http://www.ogf.org/documents/GFD.84.pdf) and defines, at an OGF
level,
> standardized URIs for things such as
> - non-bound EPRs (as discussed)
> - Data transport protocol identifies (GridFTP, HTTP, FTP, SRB, RFT,
...)
> - ...
> 
> Any ideas or comments?

The SAGA groups would happily consume such a document - at
the moment, we leave all these specification to either the implementors
or (worse) to the end users, and are not satisfied with that solution.

Cheers, Andre.


> Cheers,
> Michel
-- 
"XML is like violence: if it does not help, use more."

--
  ogsa-wg mailing list
  ogsa-wg at ogf.org
  http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg