Hi guys, OGF is still waiting on the revision of the document before it can go into publication. I guess summer break does not go nicely with boring document work :) Nevertheless, please don't let the document linger much longer... While I am on it, I would like to remind the OCCI group that OGF-42 is planned in London in early September [1], where a couple of topics are specifically depending on input from OCCI. Like, the DRMAA folx would like to finalize the OCCI bindings which are in limbo for quite a number of months, due to rather small unresolved items (such as how to render pagination). So please consider to show up to that event! Thanks, Andre. [1] https://www.ogf.org/ogf/doku.php/events/ogf-42 On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Augusto Ciuffoletti <augusto@di.unipi.it> wrote:
Here it is: that's to have a better document, not a different one.
Here is the list of the fixes I propose: line 50: complimentary -> complementary line 83: "Thus messages can be delivered by e.g." -> "For instance messages can be delivered by using" line 88/89: "on the OCCI Core instances OCCI Kind, OCCI Mixin..." -> "on the OCCI Core instances, namely OCCI Kind, OCCI Mixin..." line 89: "include" -> "includes" line 90: "identified by OCCI Actions" -> "identified by an OCCI Action" line 93: "Attribute names consist of alphanumeric characters separated by dots. The dots define a namespace hierarchy" -> "Attribute names consist of alphanumeric *strings* separated by dots that define a namespace hierarchy" line 94: remove "as shown in the following example" line 105: replace "as shown in the following example" with ": Table 1 defines the object members" from line 106. The result is: == cut here == The OCCI Resource Instance Format consists of a JSON object: Table 1 defines the object members. Section 5.1 contains a detailed example == cut here == line 120: same as line 105 line 139: same as line 105 line 146: same as line 105 line 162: same as line 105 line 179; same as line 105
I mean that none of them has a normative impact: otherwise this is probably due to my misunderstanding.
Bye
Augusto
2014-06-19 16:45 GMT+02:00 Augusto Ciuffoletti <augusto@di.unipi.it>:
I guarantee no normative proposals :-) (not by me, at least).
There are several typos around, and the "by example" approach is not entirely satisfactory to me. Nothing to do with the normative content, again.
2014-06-19 16:22 GMT+02:00 Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net>:
Dear Augusto,
the document is certainly still open for editorial comments. What *normative* changes are accepted though is up to the group and authors to decide -- but significant normative changes would call for another round of public comments, so there is a procedural barrier here. Anyway, if that is needed, then better now than later... :)
HtH, Andre.
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Augusto Ciuffoletti <augusto@di.unipi.it> wrote:
Hi Andre,
I'm browsing that paper right now, since I'd like to use the JSON for my purpose. Can I suggest minor fixes, or the doc is substantially closed and just for approval?
2014-06-16 11:18 GMT+02:00 Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net>:
Dear OCCI-WG,
please remember that the JSON Rendering document is in your court for iteration. It probably would make sense to close this one before people disappear into the summer breaks? :)
See http://redmine.ogf.org/issues/96 for details.
Best, Andre.
-- It was a sad and disappointing day when I discovered that my Universal Remote Control did not, in fact, control the Universe. (Not even remotely.) _______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
-- Augusto Ciuffoletti Dipartimento di Informatica Università di Pisa 56100 - Pisa (Italy)
-- It was a sad and disappointing day when I discovered that my Universal Remote Control did not, in fact, control the Universe. (Not even remotely.)
-- Augusto Ciuffoletti Dipartimento di Informatica Università di Pisa 56100 - Pisa (Italy)
-- Augusto Ciuffoletti Dipartimento di Informatica Università di Pisa 56100 - Pisa (Italy)
-- It was a sad and disappointing day when I discovered that my Universal Remote Control did not, in fact, control the Universe. (Not even remotely.)