[tdwg-tapir] capa concept alias + log request term

["Döring, Markus"]

Dear all,
I took the liberty to modify TAPIR to use the controlled voc [required | accepted | denied] for the logRequest attribute. Ive also added a new optional attribute "alias" to the mapped concepts of a capabilities response. This can be used to advertise the short alias of a concept as known by a CNS.

-- Markus
 
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Javier privat 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. August 2006 12:05
An: Döring, Markus
Cc: Renato De Giovanni; wixner at gmail.com
Betreff: Re: AW: concept alias in capas

for me is fine if it helps.

On 8/3/06, "Döring, Markus" <m.doering at bgbm.org> wrote:
> what do you think, I got 1 day left for work.
> do you mind adding aliases? I like it and it eases playing with TAPIR a lot.
>
> -- Markus
>
>
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Döring, Markus
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 2. August 2006 17:33
> > An: 'Renato De Giovanni'
> > Cc: Javier privat
> > Betreff: AW: AW: concept alias in capas
> >
> > correct. its just to let the clients know that there is an alias 
> > existing in the CNS(es) being used by the provider. so they dont 
> > have to interact with any CNS.
> >
> >
> > -- Markus
> >
> >
> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: Renato De Giovanni [mailto:renato at cria.org.br]
> > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 2. August 2006 16:44
> > > An: Döring, Markus; Javier privat
> > > Betreff: Re: AW: concept alias in capas
> > >
> > > Hi Markus,
> > >
> > > Then I probably didn't understand your suggestion...
> > > Right now capabilities come out like:
> > > ...
> > > <schema namespace="http://www.tdwg.org/schemas/abcd/1.2"
> > > location="http://www.bgbm.org/TDWG/CODATA/Schema/ABCD-1.20.xsd">
> > >   <mappedConcept
> > >
> > id="/DataSets/DataSet/DatasetDerivations/DatasetDerivation/DateSuppl
> > ie
> > > d" searchable="true"/>
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Ok, ok. After reading your message again I think I see.
> > > You're suggesting to add an optional attribute "alias" that
> > would make
> > > something like:
> > >
> > > ...
> > > <schema namespace="http://www.tdwg.org/schemas/abcd/1.2"
> > > location="http://www.bgbm.org/TDWG/CODATA/Schema/ABCD-1.20.xsd">
> > >   <mappedConcept
> > >
> > id="/DataSets/DataSet/DatasetDerivations/DatasetDerivation/DateSuppl
> > ie
> > > d" searchable="true" alias="DateSupplied"/> ...
> > > So DateSupplied would be the corresponding concept abbreviation 
> > > according to a previously specified CNS. Is this what you suggest?
> > > An optional shortcut to find out the aliases?
> > >
> > > Originally I had the impression that you were suggesting to 
> > > include aliases there in such a way that clients would be forced 
> > > to
> > interact
> > > with a CNS to figure out the actual concept ids...
> > > --
> > > Renato
> > >
> > > On 2 Aug 2006 at 16:02, "Döring, Markus" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hmm. not sure if i get you.
> > > > first thing, aliases are always optional.
> > > > second, a client needs to know what he is asking for.
> > > Currently I dont
> > > > know any other place as the CNS for this. it simply lists
> > > all concepts
> > > > with qualified name & alias if it exists. i cant see any
> > additional
> > > > burden for a client here.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -- Markus
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > > > Von: Renato De Giovanni [mailto:renato at cria.org.br]
> > > > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 2. August 2006 14:59
> > > > > An: Döring, Markus; Javier privat
> > > > > Betreff: Re: concept alias in capas
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Markus,
> > > > >
> > > > > For sure there are many ways we could do that, and cleaner XML 
> > > > > documents also look better to human eyes. The only thing
> > > is that it
> > > > > will put an additional burden on clients - if I
> > > understood well, in
> > > > > these cases clients will now need to know how to
> > interact with a
> > > > > CNS, is that correct?
> > > > >
> > > > > It's different than the other way around, when providers
> > > > advertise:
> > > > > "look, I know how to interact with this CNS, so if you
> > > want to send
> > > > > a cleaner document feel free to do so because I can take the 
> > > > > additional burden".
> > > > >
> > > > > (by the way, I'll probably not include any CNS capabilities in 
> > > > > TapirLink at this moment)
> > > > >
> > > > > So in principle I would prefer to keep capabilities
> > > response as it
> > > > > is. Maybe not the best thing for human eyes, but still
> > > easier to be
> > > > > processed and consumed by other programs.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > --
> > > > > Renato
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2 Aug 2006 at 11:16, "Döring, Markus" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > hey guys,
> > > > > > one more thing I found on my list. If we use concept
> > > > > aliases it would
> > > > > > be nice and helpful if they would also show up in the
> > > > capabilities,
> > > > > > wouldnt it? so why dont we add an "alias" attribute
> > to element
> > > > > > mappedConcept?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -- Markus
> > >
> > >
>