Re: [Fwd: Re: [nm-wg] 1st draft of timestamp doc]

[Ben Clifford <benc@isi.edu>]

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Dan Gunter wrote:

> It _is_ more concise, but I prefer using elements where possible for the 
> simple reason that it makes using the tools (or at least the Python ones 
> in ZSI) easier -- to me, a more important consideration.

Ok. That seems reasonable. (The tooling I've had most experience with
(which is Axis in GT3) pretty much would be ok either way, I think)

> > 5. when namespace is eventually decided, should be specific to
> > document+version rather than to NMWG as a whole? (likewise change prefix
> > nm: to nmt: so that it can be used without change in other docs)
> 
> right! Do you have a feel for the GGF-blessed way to do this? Or should 
> we start a working group to specify it ;-)

I don't know about any GGF blessed way as such. 

OGSI used URIs: 
http://www.gridforum.org/namespaces/2003/03/OGSI
http://www.gridforum.org/namespaces/2003/03/serviceData
http://www.gridforum.org/namespaces/2003/03/gridWSDLExtensions

but this issue:
https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/?aid=263
suggests using ggf.org rather than gridforum.org.

-- 
Ben Clifford
USC/ISI Center for Grid Technologies | Globus Alliance

If you are replying to this message on a support list, please keep the 
list address in the cc: field; otherwise your message will be ignored.