SourceForge : artf5890: listMandatoryEements return type

Project: RUS-WG Trackers > Doc Change Request > View Artifact

Artifact artf5890 : listMandatoryEements return type

Tracker:	Doc Change Request
Title:	listMandatoryEements return type
Description:	Mandatory elements (slide 12+13): Currently the listMandatoryElements operation returns a UsageRecord document with empty elements as placeholder for the required ones. The proposal is to replace this return type with a list of QNames of the required elements. Instead of only returning a list of QNames, it would be interesting to also allow restrictions on the value of elements. One idea would be to return a XPath expression that needs to match for any UR stored in the RUS. This would provide great flexibility. If different constrains apply for different roles/users the operations may return different results depending on the role/id of the requester. This could also with advantage be realized using different endpoints to the same service.
Submitted By:	Gilbert Netzer
Submitted On:	05/28/2007 4:45 AM EDT
Last Modified:	07/10/2007 5:21 AM EDT

	Status / Comments		Change Log		Associations (2)		Attachments

Status
Group: *
Status:*	Open
Category: *
Customer: *
Priority: *	3
Assigned To: *	None
Reported in Release: *
Fixed in Release: *
Estimated Hours: *	0
Actual Hours: *	0

Comments

Gilbert Netzer: 07/10/2007 5:21 AM EDT

Comment:

For reference from the artf5934 tracker by Xiaoyu Chen 06/24/2007 7:59 PM CDT:

...
2. Configuration (Normative)
there will be only mandatory usage record element while leaving access control to security section. The configuration is
 extended to support attribute based configuration as well aligned with URF extension frameowrk. Although this feature 
might undermine interoperability, it is worthwhile to allow URF extension propreties to be specified but with similar 
clarification as URF extension framework. However, restriction on value as what Rosario proposed will not considered in 
the specificaiton and leaves implementations to support this feature. Again RUS has close relationship with OGF URF and 
should support what feature URF would possibly provide. 
...

Action:

Update

Gilbert Netzer: 05/30/2007 11:18 AM EDT

Comment:

Comments by eMail from Gilbert Netzer, 05/28/2007 03:49 PM

In response to Rosarios comments:

I think that Donal's suggestion of using a XPath predicate to specify local constraints (and returning it via the listMandatoryElements method) is 
good. Definitely very flexible and easy to check at the client side. I would go for it!
However one word of caution, even though it may be very easy to check that a UR meets a given constraint (predicate evaluates to true), it might be 
hard to infer a acceptable UsageRecord from the given predicate (e.g. it can be hard for the client side to understand what is missing or wrong). I 
don't think this will be a big issue though. If the UR does not meet the local constraints, a human will have to inspect the situation anyway.

Action:

Update

Gilbert Netzer: 05/28/2007 4:48 AM EDT

Comment:

Comments by EMail from Rosario Piro, 05/15/2007 08:14 PM

The idea of using XPath expressions for defining the mandatroy elements that have to be present for a UR to be accepted upon insertion is good since 
it is the most flexible one, also: if the client queries the RUS server for the mandatory elements it should be straightfoward for the client to test 
its UR documents against the servers requirements before trying to insert them into the RUS.

Action:

Update

Gilbert Netzer: 05/28/2007 4:45 AM EDT
	Action:	Create

Return

< Previous

Next >