Hi Candido;
Let me try to clear up the eventType explanation anyway:
- multiple eventTypes in a single metadata are possible and common, e.g. something from the 'characteristic' namespace and the 'tool' namespace. An example would be SNMP data:
http://ggf.org/ns/nmwg/tools/snmp/2.0 http://ggf.org/ns/nmwg/characteristic/utilization/2.0
Yes, I think it's very well explained in the nmc-base document. Maybe we can add a row in tables specifying if the element is multiple or not...
Good idea, I will add this to the todo list(s).
- The example you are referring to (page 30 in the nmc doc I think?) is poorly worded. The situation I was trying to describe is merging metadata where the eventTypes are not compatible. In this case 'errors' is very different than 'utilization' and shouldn't be merged. I will place a note in this to clear this up down the road.
Does this help a little bit?
Chaining is a hard concept, and this represents my view of how it works. I may have some details wrong. I think that Martin, Jeff, and Roman should carefully read these sections to check my accuracy in describing things.
I think it's clearer in the nmc-base document. However, if I've understood it well, the document explains some general rules about chaining but it's the service which decides how it will do it, isn't it? So, there isn't any standard (or automatic) way of doing?
The procedures in place could vary from service to service, and a goal of this group should be to standardize the procedure so it is uniform. I have added TODO items regarding chaining so some of the original implementors and designers can talk and hopefully record things accurately.
Also, there is a typo in the first line in 7.1.5.1. I cannot see the the whole value of the eventType.
Fixed, thanks for finding this. -jason