W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > January to February 2009

Re: Discovery spec draft published

From: Dirk Balfanz <balfanz@google.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:04:08 -0800
Message-ID: <60c552b80901121004x599b3f75qa5192d0b8bf74a31@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
Cc: "www-talk@w3.org" <www-talk@w3.org>
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>wrote:

>  Well, it is really Resource Descriptor Discovery…
>
> Yep.

>
>
> I didn't come up with Service Discovery… we're kinda stuck with it. I am
> happy to position the comparison between Service Discovery and Descriptor
> Discovery if that makes thing clearer.
>

I think it would. Like I said, it's not a big deal, though.

Dirk.


> EHL
>
>
>
> *From:* Dirk Balfanz [mailto:balfanz@google.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, January 09, 2009 3:45 PM
> *To:* Eran Hammer-Lahav
> *Cc:* www-talk@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Discovery spec draft published
>
>
>
> Hi Eran,
>
> thanks for putting this together. I might have more comments in the future,
> but I wanted to let you know the first hiccup I encountered when reading the
> document. I don't think it's a big deal, but maybe something to think about.
>
>
> The terms "service discovery" and "resource discovery" are not consistently
> formed: In the term "service discovery" (in Section 4), "service" is the
> thing that falls out of the process of doing the discovering. In the term
> "resource discovery", "resource" is the thing that is input into the process
> of doing the discovering - what falls out of it are the resource's
> attributes.
>
> To be more consistent, they should be called "service discovery" and
> "attribute discovery", or "attribute discovery" and "resource discovery".
> The former would call out the things falling out of the process of
> discovery, while the latter calls out the things that discovery is performed
> on.
>
> I would argue that the former would be the more natural way to name things
> (would you describe the Klondike gold rush as "gold discovery" or "Yukon
> discovery" - I would argue it's "gold discovery"), which means your document
> is about "attribute discovery" (those attributes being listed in a "resource
> descriptor"), not "resource discovery".
>
> What do you think?
>
> Dirk.
>
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
> wrote:
>
> This is the new discovery workflow proposed to replace Yadis. Feedback is
> welcomed on the www-talk@w3.org list or directly to me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> EHL
>
> ---
>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
>
>        Title           : HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery
>        Author(s)       : E. Hammer-Lahav
>        Filename        : draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt
>        Pages           : 27
>        Date            : 2009-01-09
>
> This memo describes an HTTP-based process for obtaining information
> about a resource identified by a URI.  The 'information about a
> resource' - a resource descriptor - typically provides machine-
> readable information that aims to assist and enhance the interaction
> with the resource.  This memo only defines the process for locating
> and obtaining the descriptor, but leaves the descriptor format and
> its interpretation out of scope.
>
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt
>
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs@openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 12 January 2009 18:04:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:30 GMT