[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New Version Notification for draft-divilly-atompub-hierarchy-00
There is a good chance we will harmonize the names and semantics of
the link relations and h:role attribute between the hierarchy I-D and
CMIS. However, I want to clarify that the hierarchy-ID doesn't define
entry types in a way that can be compared with CMIS entry types
directly.
The h:role concept is used only in the app:collection elements to
control publishing of new entries only. On the contrary, CMIS
specifies hard typing for entries that stays with the entry for as
long as it is alive.
Moreover, CMIS entries are not always represented as Atom entries. For
example, from the CMIS spec v0.61c1 Section 3.4.5.4 states that
A folder entry "is exposed as a feed. The properties of a folder map
onto the feed tag."
Likewise, Section 3.4.5.6 states that
A policy entry "is exposed via ‘policies’ as a feed."
This spec even defines behavior for the PUT and DELETE method on an
atom:feed type resource.
The idea with hierarchy I-D is to offer a simpler hierarchy model that
assists in managing AtomPub resources without any baggage of a full-
fledged content management system. The benefit of this is in systems
that do not satisfy the MUST level requirements of CMIS, but still
want hierarchy.
Nikunj
On May 6, 2009, at 8:56 AM, Peter Keane wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:01 AM, Julian Reschke
<julian.reschke@xxxxxx> wrote:
Nikunj Mehta wrote:
We would like to solicit the group's feedback on this I-D. There is
already some interest both internally at Oracle and from other
parties in
advancing this I-D along standards track.
...
I note that there is overlap with the AtomPub bindings in CMIS (see
<http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/32171/Draft%2061.zip
>),
and I think it would be totally great if we could find out whether
a single
set of extensions would be sufficient.
While I see some overlap, it seems like the use cases are quite
different (hierarchy in CMIS is just a small part of a much larger
goal). I see some overlap in a couple of link@rels and it seems the
'h:role' extension in hierarchy-ID is analogous to 'type' in CMIS. I
could see some benefit in harmonizing names where that makes sense.
CMIS new link relation types:
parents
repository
children
descendents
allowableactions
allversions
latestversion
relationships
type
source
target
stream
policies
pwc
CMIS entry types:
type
document
folder
relationship
policy
(also two new mime types: for query doc & allowable actions doc)
hierarchy-ID new link relation types:
master
detail
hierarchy-ID entry types:
h:role=master
h:role=detail
(happy to be corrected if I got any of that wrong)
--peter keane
BR, Julian
Nikunj R Mehta | Consulting Member of Technical Staff | Phone: +1 650
506 0679 | Blog: http://o-micron.blogspot.com
Oracle Advanced Development Projects
500 Oracle Parkway #4OP662 | Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help
protect the environment