W dniu 2011-09-23 14:22, Jason Zurawski pisze:
Hi Roman;
I think this is a good idea, would you be able to make the changes to the document and sent it back to the list?
OK. I'll do that at the beginning of next week. Roman
Thanks;
-jason
On 9/23/11 12:29 PM, thus spake Roman Łapacz:
W dniu 2011-09-23 11:32, Jason Zurawski pisze:
Gang;
Hi,
In typing up the final version of the status codes into the document, I hit upon a snag. Here is an example of what was proposed in the prior mail:
http://schemas.ogf.org/nmc/2011/09/status/informational/protocol version/
This goes against our typical method of constructing namespaces. I would suggest we do this instead:
http://schemas.ogf.org/nmc/status/informational/protocol version/2011/09/
Or even better using:
201109
or
20110923
Right. Good you spotted this. I prefer to have just one field for version number (201109 or 20110923) with an exception for early testing versions (201109/beta or 20110923/beta).
As the 'version' string. I am attaching an updated document going with the first suggestion, I prefer the last best of all. Other opinions?
What do you think to replace the code hierarchy with the pattern in the beginning of section 2. Example:
--example---------------------
"http://schemas.ogf.org/nmc/status/"<STATUS_CATEGORY>"/"<STATUS_NAME>"/"<VERSION>
<STATUS_CATEGORY> may have the following text values: - informational - successful - redirection - clienterror - servererror
<STATUS_NAME> depends on the status category and may have the following text values: - informational category -- protocol version -- data limitation -- service_contact - client error category -- bad_message -- bad request -- authentication_failed -- unauthorized -- message not allowed -- event_type_not_allowed -- event_type_not_allowed -- request_too_large -- request_timeout -- protocol_not_allowed -- chaining_not_understood - servererror category -- data_fetch_error -- too_busy -- administrative_down Two categories, successful and redirection, do not need to have certain status names.
VERSION is a string presenting information about the version of protocol, e.g. 201109 or 20110925. In case of early testing version an optional part after "/" may be added (e.g. 201109/beta or 20110925/beta) .
-- end---------------------
I'm thinking about such update because version numbers don't look good in the structure. They are not generic. The use of pattern solves this issue. What do you think? (of course a short description below the pattern in my example may be done much better; I just wanted to present my idea).
Cheers, Roman
Thanks;
-jason