- From: Paul Denning <pauld@mitre.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:51:24 -0400
- To: www-ws-desc@w3.org, atom-protocol@imc.org, atom-syntax@imc.org
Given things like WSO2 Registry and Mule Galaxy, which provide Atom Publishing Protocol interfaces, it seems that it would be useful to have a "standard" atom:scheme and an associated Atom Category document. Compared to UDDI, Atom is generally considered more lightweight and ubiquitous. However, UDDI has some good aspects that perhaps should be modeled or imitated using Atom. For example, to register a WSDL document in UDDI [0], a tModel is created and some information gleened from the WSDL is used in the categoryBag. So, to find WSDL in UDDI, you search for tModels with a certain well-defined category in the categoryBag. [0] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/tn/uddi-spec-tc-tn-wsdl-v2.htm Now that Atom Publishing Protocol (APP) is being used for publishing to a registry/repository, we should look at some conventions for the Atom category element to help users find WSDL and related SOA artifacts across (i.e., aggregation of) a set of heterogenous registry/repository feeds. That is, a large enterprise may have several registry/repositories, each with Atom feeds for WSDL, which I would like to aggregate into one composite feed for WSDL from across the enterprise. Finding the feeds for WSDL from among the many feeds that an enterprise may have should be easier. What I think this boils down to is a standard taxonomy (aka, value set, vocabulary) documented in an Atom Category Document [1]. [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5023#section-7 For example, <?xml version="1.0" ?> <app:categories xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" fixed="yes" scheme="http://example.com/soa"> <atom:category term="wsdlSpec" /> <atom:category term="wspSpec" /> <atom:category term="bpelSpec" /> </app:categories> Obviously @scheme would benefit from an IRI defined by an established standards organization (W3C, OASIS, IETF, ...). Above I define only three terms, but others should be considered. The terms above would be used, respectively, to register/publish WSDL, WS-Policy, and BPEL. Therefore if the 'wsdlSpec' category were to appear in an Atom Entry or Feed Document, it would appear as: <atom:category scheme="http://example.com/soa" term="wsdlSpec"/> If a registry/repository wanted to offer a feed/collection of WSDL documents, then an Atom Service document might look like the following: <?xml version="1.0" encoding='utf-8'?> <service xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2007/app" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"> <workspace> <atom:title>Registry</atom:title> <collection href="http://example.com/soa" > <atom:title>My Blog Entries</atom:title> <categories href="http://example.org/soa" /> </collection> <collection href="http://feeds.example.org/soa/wsdl" > <atom:title>WSDL</atom:title> <categories fixed="yes"> <atom:category scheme="http://example.com/soa" term="wsdlSpec" /> </categories> <accept>application/wsdl+xml</accept> <accept>text/xml</accept> </collection> </workspace> </service> Has any of the above been considered? Paul
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2008 20:52:39 UTC