W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-resource-access@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Issue 6404 - proposal

From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 20:48:30 -0500
To: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF88F75CED.299EFE8B-ON85257558.0009E929-85257558.0009F693@us.ibm.com>
Resending since the html doesn't show up in the archives.

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com

__________________

With no more chatter on this one... here's my proposal:

Define the absence of a Dialect to mean the MEX dialect - something like:
[Body]/mex:GetMetadata/mex:Dialect
      When this element is present, the response MUST include only 
Metadata Sections with the indicated dialect; if the receiver does not 
have any Metadata Sections of the indicated dialect, the response MUST 
include zero Metadata Sections. When this element is not present, the 
implied value is the MEX dialect. 
<delete> there is no implied value and so the response may include 
Metadata Sections with any dialect. </delete>

And define the MEX dialect - add the following after the above text:
[Body]/mex:GetMetadata/mex:Dialect="http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ws-mex"
      Barring some additional constraints, not defined by this 
specification, specifying the MEX dialect in a GetMetadata request message 
means that the service SHOULD return all available metadata formats that 
this client is allowed to retrieve.

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com



Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS 
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
01/29/2009 10:11 PM

To
Geoff Bullen <Geoff.Bullen@microsoft.com>
cc
"public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>, 
public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
Subject
Re: Issue 6404 - use of "whatever"







Along those line, it would seem that saying something like "barring some 
negotiation, the absence of a Dialect value is equivalent tousing  the MEX 
dialect".  Gives the freedom for someone to profile it later - but 
otherwise we make sure "null" is well defined. 

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com 


Geoff Bullen <Geoff.Bullen@microsoft.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org 
01/29/2009 09:06 PM 


To
"public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org> 
cc

Subject
Issue 6404 - use of "whatever"








This issue is about defining the MEX dialect and defining what gets 
returned. 
  
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6404 
  
In particular, I was asked to provide an example of why it might be 
useful, in the case where no dialect is specified in the GetMetadata 
request, for the service itself to be able to decide what it would return 
(the so-called ?whatever? case).  The other option would be for this case 
to return all MEX sections. 
  
The best example I can provide for the ?whatever? case is this: 
  
If the MEX specification gets ?profiled? for a specific purpose, it would 
be very useful to allow the profile to be able to specify what metadata is 
to be returned in this default case (especially the non-MEX defined 
metadata sections).  If you do not do this then each profile would have to 
define some separate dialect to mean ?give me all the metadata within my 
profile?.  Thus the default case gives you an over-loadable definition of 
?all? or perhaps ?normal?, which can include non-MEX defined sections. 
  
In a typical profiled case: 
Nothing = ?return all metadata within my profile? 
MEX = ?return all MEX dialects? 
  
If it is not a profiled implementation, the spec could be recommend that 
the implementation return: 
Nothing = MEX = ?return all MEX dialects? 
  
Received on Monday, 9 February 2009 01:49:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:17:45 GMT