Simon,
Look OK; there's also the option that
we leave the existing documents/URLs entirely alone, and leave the old
form latest URL pointing at CD01 forever, although I think thats the least
desirable all round.
Regards, Simon
Simon Holdsworth
STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair
MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK
Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898
Internet -
Simon Nash <>
18/06/2009 11:48
To
OASIS Bindings <>
cc
Subject
Re: [sca-bindings] Document names and
URLs
Based on the discussion on last week's call, here's
a new draft
of the note to Mary. Is this OK?
Simon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mary,
The Bindings TC discussed the naming issue and has decided to revert
to the previous names in the short term so that the process of getting
to public review can be expedited and is not blocked on the naming
issue. The Bindings TC also decided to continue to pursue the adoption
of its previously agreed new naming convention with OASIS TC Admin.
The TC would like to begin publishing new versions of its documents
using the new naming convention and new form of URLs as soon as
possible. For documents that have already been published using the
existing naming convention, the TC would like to leave these in place
at their current URLs.
For each of the affected documents, the TC would like to create
new "latest" URLs that match the new naming conventions. For
the
current "latest" URLs, there are two options:
1) For each of the affected documents, use an HTTP redirect from
the current "latest" URL to the new "latest"
URL. These redirects
can be set up as a one-time operation, so that as the documents
referenced by the new-form "latest" URLs change
in the future,
these documents will automatically also become available
at the
current old-form "latest" URLs.
2) Every time a new document is published, both the new-form
"latest" URL and the old-form "latest"
URL would be re-linked to
point to the new document. This does not require any
HTTP
redirects, but it does require additional re-linking of "latest"
URLs each time new versions of the documents are published.
The TC would be willing to accept either of these approaches. Which
of them would be most convenient for OASIS TC Admin and IT Services?
Simon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Simon Nash wrote:
> I took an action last week to follow up with Mary on this
> subject. Here is the proposed note that I am intending to send.
> Any comments or suggestions for changes?
>
> Simon
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Mary,
> The Bindings TC discussed the naming issue and has decided to revert
> to the previous names in the short term so that the process of getting
> to public review can be expedited and is not blocked on the naming
> issue. The Bindings TC also decided to continue to pursue the
adoption
> of its previously agreed new naming convention with OASIS TC Admin.
>
> From the discussion on the mailing list and the discussion on
the
> TC call last week, it seems there are two possible options for
> managing this renaming without causing problems for users who have
> already downloaded the documents or linked to the existing URLs.
>
> 1) Create latest and current version URLs following the new
> naming convention, and use these URLs for new documents
going
> forward as well as for the documents that have already
been
> published, with redirection from the old URLs to the
new URLs.
>
> 2) Leave the existing latest and current version URLs in place for
> the documents that have already been published, and create
latest
> and current version URLs following the new naming convention
> for new versions of these documents going forward. (It
would
> also be possible to duplicate the documents that have
already
> been published under the new URL naming convention if
this is
> considered useful.)
>
> Of these, option 1 seems simplest and this would be the TC's
> preferred solution. If OASIS cannot support this for technical
> reasons, the TC would be willing to consider option 2 as a
> fallback alternative.
>
> Simon
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU
