SourceForge : artf6577: layer and label encoding terminology

Project: NML-WG Trackers > Schema Progress > View Artifact

Artifact artf6577 : layer and label encoding terminology

Tracker:	Schema Progress
Title:	layer and label encoding terminology
Description:	NML has currently a one-to-one relation between the layer encoding (a URI to define the layer of sublayer of a specific Port of Link) and the label type (a URI to define the resource label of a technology). Proposal: (was: Option 4). Use "encoding" for layer encoding and "labeltype" for label type <nml:Port id="...."> <nml:encoding>http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#802.3</nml:encoding>; <nml:label labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#vlan">1780</nml:label> </nml:Port>
Submitted By:	Freek Dijkstra
Submitted On:	07/27/2012 12:46 PM EDT
Last Modified:	11/30/2012 8:03 AM EST
Closed:	11/30/2012 8:03 AM EST

	Status / Comments		Change Log		Associations		Attachments

Status
Status:*	Completed
Category:*	– Labels / Channels
Priority: *	2
Assigned To: *	None

Comments

Jeroen van der Ham: 11/30/2012 8:03 AM EST
	Action:	Update Closed set to 11/30/2012 Status changed from Last Call to Completed

Freek Dijkstra: 09/07/2012 3:30 AM EDT
	Action:	Update Status changed from Under discussion to Last Call

Freek Dijkstra: 09/06/2012 9:50 AM EDT

Action:

Update
Description changed from

NML has currently a one-to-one relation between the layer encoding (a URI to define the layer of sublayer of a specific 
Port of Link) and the label type (a URI to define the resource label of a technology).

The following options exist to denote the layer encoding and label type:

Option 1. Use "encoding" for both layer encoding and label type:

 <nml:Port id="....">
    <nml:encoding>http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#802.3</nml:encoding>;
    <nml:label encoding="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#vlan">1780</nml:label>;
 </nml:Port>

Option 2. Use "layer" for layer encoding and "encoding" for label type:

 <nml:Port id="....">
    <nml:layer>http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#802.3</nml:encoding>;
    <nml:label encoding="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#vlan">1780</nml:label>;
 </nml:Port>

Option 3. Use "encoding" for layer encoding and "labeltype" for label type

 <nml:Port id="....">
    <nml:encoding>http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#802.3</nml:encoding>;
    <nml:label type="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#vlan">1780</nml:label>;
 </nml:Port>

Option 4. Use "encoding" for layer encoding and "labeltype" for label type

 <nml:Port id="....">
    <nml:encoding>http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#802.3</nml:encoding>;
    <nml:label labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#vlan">1780</nml:label>;
 </nml:Port>

etc. etc. (there are numerous options)

NML has currently a one-to-one relation between the layer encoding (a URI to define the layer of sublayer of a specific 
Port of Link) and the label type (a URI to define the resource label of a technology).

Proposal: (was: Option 4). Use "encoding" for layer encoding and "labeltype" for label type

 <nml:Port id="....">
    <nml:encoding>http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#802.3</nml:encoding>;
    <nml:label labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet#vlan">1780</nml:label>;
 </nml:Port>

Freek Dijkstra: 09/06/2012 9:47 AM EDT
	Comment:	I have a preference for labeltype for labels, and either encoding or layer for layer.
	Action:	Update

Jason Zurawski: 08/16/2012 7:02 AM EDT
	Comment:	I prefer option 3 since its matches how I would have designed this closest, but will accept option 4 if there is a strong dislike of the attribute 'type'.
	Action:	Update

Freek Dijkstra: 08/09/2012 11:46 AM EDT

Comment:

This was incorrectly flagged as last call. There is no concensus yet, so that was not possible. My fault.

During the conf call of Aug 9, 2012 there seemed some votes for "labeltype", but "encoding" and "layer" where mentioned too, so please still post your
 preference for BOTH items here, so we can reach a decision.

Action:

Update
Status changed from Last Call to Under discussion

Jeroen van der Ham: 08/09/2012 11:17 AM EDT
	Comment:	i prefer labeltype for the label type. we can use either encoding or layer for the layer, no preference on that.
	Action:	Update

Freek Dijkstra: 08/08/2012 10:28 AM EDT
	Action:	Update Priority changed from 3 to 2 Status changed from Under discussion to Last Call

Freek Dijkstra: 07/28/2012 3:01 AM EDT

Comment:

Previous comments on the mailing list:


Aaron Brown wrote:

> This syntax seems reasonable. My only minor niggle is i'd prefer it be
> 'type' instead of 'labelType' since it's an attribute of a label
> construct, and adding 'label' to it seems redundant.

Freek replied:

> Henrik suggested labelType, because "type" was an overloaded word.
> 
> I also don't like "type", because I may later propose to introduce the
> distinction between resource label, source label and destination label.
> That's also a "type".

Action:

Update

Freek Dijkstra: 07/27/2012 12:47 PM EDT
	Comment:	Please post your preference here. E.g. * "layer" for layer encoding * "labeltype" for label type
	Action:	Update

Freek Dijkstra: 07/27/2012 12:46 PM EDT
	Action:	Create

Return