Send an email to inputs-and-semantics-wg@lists.trustoverip.org to request a calendar invite (you can subscribe to the mailing list at lists.trustoverip.org).

Agenda

Guiding Goal: The granularity of OCA. What might the next version of OCA look like?

Meeting Notes

Recording


From the chat:

Mike Bennett to Everyone (6:27 PM)

You can't rely on human-readable labels as a reliable source of meaning. Need some formal semantics.

Neil Thomson to Everyone (6:29 PM)

Need schema path identification scheme.

This is used in dimensional data models as the "schema base" identification model

Steven Milstein to Everyone (6:30 PM)

If you consider systems that support Internationalization (i18n), attribute names, like labels, messages or any text would have unique IDs(keys)

It’s time consuming from a human-readable point of view, if you’re only concerned with one language.

Can the schema base have “required overlays”?

Robert Mitwicki to Everyone (6:43 PM)

yes we call it core overlays

Burak Serdar to Everyone (6:46 PM)

I suggest you change the schema base examples to use hashes as attribute names, so they don't look like arrays.

Neil Thomson to Everyone (6:46 PM)

Would agree on the base data - which is the storage format. Otherwise "type" is really formatting convenience (e.g. time of day, height, weight)

Carly Huitema to Everyone (6:47 PM)

The risk of hashes is it is really hard to type or compare. I agree attr-1 suggests an array, but it is also easy to compare.

Paul Knowles to Everyone (6:48 PM)

Thanks, Burak. Agreed. We can go with hashes as attribute names.

Salvatore D'Agostino to Everyone (6:49 PM)

depends on the size of the name space.. collisions  concerns

identifier space..

Burak Serdar to Everyone (6:50 PM)

Are attributes globally unique? Or are they only unique within the schema it is used in?

Robert Mitwicki to Everyone (6:51 PM)

the idea was to have something global unique

as soon as we can capture the context

Burak Serdar to Everyone (6:52 PM)

I suppose that can work, but then you get into a registry of attributes, who governs that, etc.  I suggest the only requirement be that they are unique within the schema, and schema.attr globally identifies it

Salvatore D'Agostino to Me (Direct Message) (6:53 PM)

consider signed object vs. hash

Mike Bennett to Everyone (7:02 PM)

I concur this can be used to present and review schema details in the different OCA layers.


Participants (Name / Location / Time zone / Affiliation):


Leadership positions:

  • Inputs and Semantics WG
  • Privacy & Risk TF


ToIP Semantics WG Weekly Meeting.pptx

  • No labels