Re: Discovery spec draft published

[Dirk Balfanz]

Hi Eran,

thanks for putting this together. I might have more comments in the future, but I wanted to let you know the first hiccup I encountered when reading the document. I don't think it's a big deal, but maybe something to think about.

The terms "service discovery" and "resource discovery" are not consistently formed: In the term "service discovery" (in Section 4), "service" is the thing that falls out of the process of doing the discovering. In the term "resource discovery", "resource" is the thing that is input into the process of doing the discovering - what falls out of it are the resource's attributes.

To be more consistent, they should be called "service discovery" and "attribute discovery", or "attribute discovery" and "resource discovery". The former would call out the things falling out of the process of discovery, while the latter calls out the things that discovery is performed on.

I would argue that the former would be the more natural way to name things (would you describe the Klondike gold rush as "gold discovery" or "Yukon discovery" - I would argue it's "gold discovery"), which means your document is about "attribute discovery" (those attributes being listed in a "resource descriptor"), not "resource discovery".

What do you think?

Dirk.

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@...> wrote:

This is the new discovery workflow proposed to replace Yadis. Feedback is
welcomed on the www-talk@... list or directly to me.

Thanks,

EHL

---

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

       Title           : HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery
       Author(s)       : E. Hammer-Lahav
       Filename        : draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt
       Pages           : 27
       Date            : 2009-01-09

This memo describes an HTTP-based process for obtaining information
about a resource identified by a URI.  The 'information about a
resource' - a resource descriptor - typically provides machine-
readable information that aims to assist and enhance the interaction
with the resource.  This memo only defines the process for locating
and obtaining the descriptor, but leaves the descriptor format and
its interpretation out of scope.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt

_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
specs@...
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs

[Eran Hammer-Lahav]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Well, it is really Resource Descriptor Discovery…

 

I didn’t come up with Service Discovery… we’re kinda stuck with it. I am happy to position the comparison between Service Discovery and Descriptor Discovery if that makes thing clearer.

 

EHL

 

From: Dirk Balfanz [mailto:balfanz@...]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 3:45 PM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: www-talk@...
Subject: Re: Discovery spec draft published

 

Hi Eran,

thanks for putting this together. I might have more comments in the future, but I wanted to let you know the first hiccup I encountered when reading the document. I don't think it's a big deal, but maybe something to think about..

The terms "service discovery" and "resource discovery" are not consistently formed: In the term "service discovery" (in Section 4), "service" is the thing that falls out of the process of doing the discovering. In the term "resource discovery", "resource" is the thing that is input into the process of doing the discovering - what falls out of it are the resource's attributes.

To be more consistent, they should be called "service discovery" and "attribute discovery", or "attribute discovery" and "resource discovery". The former would call out the things falling out of the process of discovery, while the latter calls out the things that discovery is performed on.

I would argue that the former would be the more natural way to name things (would you describe the Klondike gold rush as "gold discovery" or "Yukon discovery" - I would argue it's "gold discovery"), which means your document is about "attribute discovery" (those attributes being listed in a "resource descriptor"), not "resource discovery".

What do you think?

Dirk.

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@...> wrote:

This is the new discovery workflow proposed to replace Yadis. Feedback is
welcomed on the www-talk@... list or directly to me.

Thanks,

EHL

---

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

       Title           : HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery
       Author(s)       : E. Hammer-Lahav
       Filename        : draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt
       Pages           : 27
       Date            : 2009-01-09

This memo describes an HTTP-based process for obtaining information
about a resource identified by a URI.  The 'information about a
resource' - a resource descriptor - typically provides machine-
readable information that aims to assist and enhance the interaction
with the resource.  This memo only defines the process for locating
and obtaining the descriptor, but leaves the descriptor format and
its interpretation out of scope.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt

_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
specs@...
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs

 

[Eran Hammer-Lahav-2]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Well, it is really Resource Descriptor Discovery…

 

I didn't come up with Service Discovery… we're kinda stuck with it. I am happy to position the comparison between Service Discovery and Descriptor Discovery if that makes thing clearer.

 

EHL

 

From: Dirk Balfanz [mailto:balfanz@...]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 3:45 PM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: www-talk@...
Subject: Re: Discovery spec draft published

 

Hi Eran,

thanks for putting this together. I might have more comments in the future, but I wanted to let you know the first hiccup I encountered when reading the document. I don't think it's a big deal, but maybe something to think about.

The terms "service discovery" and "resource discovery" are not consistently formed: In the term "service discovery" (in Section 4), "service" is the thing that falls out of the process of doing the discovering. In the term "resource discovery", "resource" is the thing that is input into the process of doing the discovering - what falls out of it are the resource's attributes.

To be more consistent, they should be called "service discovery" and "attribute discovery", or "attribute discovery" and "resource discovery". The former would call out the things falling out of the process of discovery, while the latter calls out the things that discovery is performed on.

I would argue that the former would be the more natural way to name things (would you describe the Klondike gold rush as "gold discovery" or "Yukon discovery" - I would argue it's "gold discovery"), which means your document is about "attribute discovery" (those attributes being listed in a "resource descriptor"), not "resource discovery".

What do you think?

Dirk.

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@...> wrote:

This is the new discovery workflow proposed to replace Yadis. Feedback is
welcomed on the www-talk@... list or directly to me.

Thanks,

EHL

---

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

       Title           : HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery
       Author(s)       : E. Hammer-Lahav
       Filename        : draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt
       Pages           : 27
       Date            : 2009-01-09

This memo describes an HTTP-based process for obtaining information
about a resource identified by a URI.  The 'information about a
resource' - a resource descriptor - typically provides machine-
readable information that aims to assist and enhance the interaction
with the resource.  This memo only defines the process for locating
and obtaining the descriptor, but leaves the descriptor format and
its interpretation out of scope.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt

_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
specs@...
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs

 

[Joseph A Holsten]

  Dirk Balfanz wrote:

> The terms "service discovery" and "resource discovery" are not  
> consistently formed: In the term "service discovery" (in Section  
> 4), "service" is the thing that falls out of the process of doing  
> the discovering. In the term "resource discovery", "resource" is  
> the thing that is input into the process of doing the discovering -  
> what falls out of it are the resource's attributes.
>
> To be more consistent, they should be called "service discovery"  
> and "attribute discovery", or "attribute discovery" and "resource  
> discovery". The former would call out the things falling out of the  
> process of discovery, while the latter calls out the things that  
> discovery is performed on.

Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
> Well, it is really Resource Descriptor Discovery…

Attribute Discovery would be just saying, "To find a link with a  
certain rel-type, check the document links, the link headers, and the  
site-meta for the rel-type you're looking for." Resource Descriptor  
Discovery is performing Attribute Discovery for the "describedby" rel-
type. It's trying to find the attribute pointing to the Resource  
Description document, like an XRD (Extensible Resource Descriptor) or  
POWDER (Protocol for Web Description Resources). Typically, these  
will be used for Service Discovery, but often can describe many other  
things as well.

Have I got that right?

http://josephholsten.com

[Dirk Balfanz]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@...> wrote:

Well, it is really Resource Descriptor Discovery…

Yep.

 

I didn't come up with Service Discovery… we're kinda stuck with it. I am happy to position the comparison between Service Discovery and Descriptor Discovery if that makes thing clearer.

I think it would. Like I said, it's not a big deal, though.

Dirk.
 

EHL

 

From: Dirk Balfanz [mailto:balfanz@...]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 3:45 PM
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
Cc: www-talk@...
Subject: Re: Discovery spec draft published

 

Hi Eran,

thanks for putting this together. I might have more comments in the future, but I wanted to let you know the first hiccup I encountered when reading the document. I don't think it's a big deal, but maybe something to think about.

The terms "service discovery" and "resource discovery" are not consistently formed: In the term "service discovery" (in Section 4), "service" is the thing that falls out of the process of doing the discovering. In the term "resource discovery", "resource" is the thing that is input into the process of doing the discovering - what falls out of it are the resource's attributes.

To be more consistent, they should be called "service discovery" and "attribute discovery", or "attribute discovery" and "resource discovery". The former would call out the things falling out of the process of discovery, while the latter calls out the things that discovery is performed on.

I would argue that the former would be the more natural way to name things (would you describe the Klondike gold rush as "gold discovery" or "Yukon discovery" - I would argue it's "gold discovery"), which means your document is about "attribute discovery" (those attributes being listed in a "resource descriptor"), not "resource discovery".

What do you think?

Dirk.

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@...> wrote:

This is the new discovery workflow proposed to replace Yadis. Feedback is
welcomed on the www-talk@... list or directly to me.

Thanks,

EHL

---

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

       Title           : HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery
       Author(s)       : E. Hammer-Lahav
       Filename        : draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt
       Pages           : 27
       Date            : 2009-01-09

This memo describes an HTTP-based process for obtaining information
about a resource identified by a URI.  The 'information about a
resource' - a resource descriptor - typically provides machine-
readable information that aims to assist and enhance the interaction
with the resource.  This memo only defines the process for locating
and obtaining the descriptor, but leaves the descriptor format and
its interpretation out of scope.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hammer-discovery-00.txt

_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
specs@...
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs