Agreed to defer introduction of URNs to DFDL vNext due to problems that XML tools would experience if both allowed. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh@uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Mike Beckerle To: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Cc: Suman Kalia , dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Date: 19/11/2012 21:33 Subject: Action 192: URN scheme - was: Re: [DFDL-WG] new action item needed: DFDL URN specification I'd like to add a sub-space for implementations to use for their implementation-specific things. Nice thing about a URN is that it can specify a structured scheme for this: I suggest "imp" as a sub-specifier for implementation-specific URNs. E.g., urn:ogf:dfdl:2011:imp:... What goes after imp is an identifier of an implementation. E.g., urn:ogf:dfdl:2011:imp:opensource.ncsa.illinois.edu:... urn:ogf:dfdl:2011:imp:ibm.com:... and beneath that is anything that implementation needs/wants. E.g., a namespace for extension properties that are non-standard, a version ID for sub-versions of that implementation, etc. etc. This allows an implementation to define extension properties, and have other implementations give warnings that those are detected, but not understood. ...mikeb On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Steve Hanson wrote: Using the OGF's URN registration document [GFD.191] as a reference, I suggest: Type URL Proposed URN common root urn:ogf:dfdl xmlns attribute http://www.ogf.org/dfdl/dfdl-1.0/ urn:ogf:dfdl:2011 source attribute http://www.ogf.org/dfdl/ urn:ogf:dfdl [GFD.191] http://www.ogf.org/documents/GFD.191.pdf Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh@uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Suman Kalia To: Mike Beckerle , Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Date: 25/10/2012 17:15 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] new action item needed: DFDL URN specification Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org I tend to agree that specifying urn for namespaces is better choice and URL should be used for schema locations; however convention of specifying URL for namespaces is long established some implementations use the namespace URL to return the actual schema. When I try to access the namespace URL for XML schema , it gives me reference to the document but not schema.. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Mike Beckerle To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, Date: 10/25/2012 08:18 AM Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] new action item needed: DFDL URN specification Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org I wanted to add to this discussion the w3c blog page that highlights the problem of the http-based naming scheme. There are many articles about this, this is just one of them. http://www.w3.org/blog/systeam/2008/02/08/w3c_s_excessive_dtd_traffic/ On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Mike Beckerle wrote: Introduction: Using URLs as identifiers has caused no end of problems. E.g., in DFDL we have http://www.ogf.org/dfdl/dfdl-1.0/ as an identifier. W3C has http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema and others. W3C has badly regretted establishing this convention, as they have farms of servers that do nothing but quickly return 404 errors to save network-aware applications the network-timeout delay that would otherwise occur. There are parties interested in exploiting DFDL who want DFDL schemas to NOT contain network URLs because it simply creates a concern about network access whenever a DFDL schema is inspected/used. Pre-Proposal: The new way to do this is with URNs which would look roughly like this: urn:ogf:dfdl:standard:dfdl-1.0. The whole point is that some other mechanism is used to establish correspondences between these and any resources in file systems, networks, or built-in to implementations. One such mechanism is called XML Catalog. The point is that it is a name in a managed namespace which cannot be confused with a network protocol URL. OGF is already establishing urn:ogf, and an ogf subgroup has already proposed urn:ogf:network for network resources. DFDL schemas aren't network resources so we don't want to be a substructure underneath network. Some other mechanism is used to establish correspondences between these and any resources in file systems, networks, or built-in to implementations. One such mechanism is called XML Catalog. Summary: An action item should be to specify DFDL urn, submit to OGF as a proposed namespace, and then produce errata/spec changes to specify its use. This requires a small design activity to specify a scheme for the sub-structure of the DFDL URNs (i.e., scheme for the stuff after urn:ogf:dfdl:...) where we want standard identifiers for versions of the standard, but we probably also want a few other things (e.g., I would like a space for implementations to identify themselves, i.e., an implementation-specific sub-area within our URNs.) Our existing URLs can be compatible (deprecated) practice vs the preferred URNs. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair Tel: 781-330-0412 -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair Tel: 781-330-0412 -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair Tel: 781-330-0412 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU