Re: [cmis] followup on yesterday's discussion of the namespace proposal

Package is in the schema, but apparently not in part 1.  What I suggest is similar to 87 but based on name rather than id:

a) remove typeId, baseType, baseTypeQueryName from type

b) remove baseType

c) add baseTypeName;  whose value is one of the defined cmis base types (cmis:Document)

d) rename parentId to parentTypeName

e) add globalUniqueName to property and type definition:

	This attribute contains a a globally unique name either in namespace format or Clark  format which uniquely identifies this type or property.

f) remove id, package from property definition

g) clarify name may contain prefixes utilizing ':'

h) clarify all cmis defined types and properties utilizes cmis prefix

g) extend query grammar to support multiple prefixes:

<prefixedidentifier> ::= [ ( <prefixedidentifier> | <identifier> ) ":" ] <identifier>

<identifier> ::=			!! As defined by SQL-92 grammar.

This leaves on type definition:

- name, globalUniqueName, baseTypeName

property definition:

- name, globalUniqueName

In combination with namespace/prefixing proposal, then the base object types would be:

cmis;Document, cmis:Folder, cmis:Policy, cmis:Relationship

-Al

Al Brown

Emerging Standards and Industry Frameworks

CMIS: https://w3.tap.ibm.com/w3ki07/display/ECMCMIS/Home 

Industry Frameworks: https://w3.tap.ibm.com/w3ki07/display/ECMIF/Home

Office 714 327 3453

Mobile 714 263 6441

Email  

CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE: The contents of this message, including any attachments, are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the person or entity to whom the message was addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender. Please also permanently delete all copies of the original message and any attached documentation. 

Julian Reschke ---04/15/2009 07:14:07 AM---Hi,

From:

Julian Reschke <>

To:

CMIS TC List <>

Date:

04/15/2009 07:14 AM

Subject:

[cmis] followup on yesterday's discussion of the namespace proposal

Hi,

in yesterday's telco, we heard concerns about potential overlap between 

the proposed new globallyUniqueName attribute, and existing attributes 

like "id" and "package".

1) It appears that there is no "package" attribute; it may have been 

discussed earlier, but I can't find it in Draft 61a.

2) Regarding the potential overlap with "id"... That attribute is 

currently defined as:

		 "This attribute contains a system-assigned ID which

		 uniquely identifies this property."

So this would not work, as the whole point of the globallyUniqueName is 

that it can be used to have the same identifier across multiple 

repositories and protocols; so, by definition, it can't be 

system-assigned -- maybe we can just relax or rephrase that requirement, 

though.

Also,

3) for consistency with other object types like documents, the new 

attribute should probably be present on all object types (for instance, 

in JCR, node types are defined as expanded names as well).

Feedback appreciated,

Julian

-- 

<green/>bytes GmbH, Hafenweg 16, D-48155 Münster, Germany

Amtsgericht Münster: HRB5782

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php