Subject: [Simple] XCAP List Issue 2: Whither URI

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 07:18:33 -0400

There was some email discussions on this some time back, but no resolution.

Currently, the <entry> element has the resource uri as an attribute of 
the <entry>. There was a proposal on the list to make it a child, just 
like <display-name>. So, it would look like this:

<entry>
   <uri>sip:[email-masked]</uri>
   <display-name>Joe User</display-name>
</entry>

The issue is, do we do this or keep the current format?

I strongly believe we should keep the current format. There are two reasons:

1. It reduces the size and simplifies the structure needed. This is an 
issue in ad-hoc group calls or ad-hoc IM where the body of the SIP 
request will carry one of these things. There have been requests to keep 
that list flat, since nothing more than a sequence of URI is needed.

2. URI is really what we want as an index to each entry. Moving it into 
a child makes it hard to select an entry by URI when using XCAP. We do 
also have the optional "name" attribute, but I think its a mistake to 
have two indices, and so I want to remove that (Issue 3, email to follow).

Does anyone object to keeping the current format, with uri as an 
attribute and not a child element?

Thanks,
Jonathan R.
-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                600 Lanidex Plaza
Chief Technology Officer                    Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
dynamicsoft
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 10:11:29 +0300

Jonathan:

One issue that makes me think a child element will have advantages is 
the case when there are several URIs representing an entry, for instance 
a sip and press or im URIs.

If you represent the URI as an attribute then you can't have repetitions 
of the same attribute. However, if you represent the URI as an element 
you can have repetitions, for example:

<entry>
   <uri>sip:[email-masked]</uri>
   <uri>pres:[email-masked]</uri>
   <display-name>Joe User</display-name>
</entry>

If you have an attribute, you will need to create a new entry per URI, 
and that might not be so efficient.

- Miguel

-- 
Miguel A. Garcia           tel:+358-50-4804586
Nokia Research Center      Helsinki, Finland

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:16:56 -0400

inline.

> a sip and press or im URIs.

What would that mean, in terms of list subscriptions? Would each of them 
get subscribed to? I don't think thats what you intend. It may very well 
be that there are multiple URIs, but they each probably have a different 
meaning.

> and that might not be so efficient.

You can have the best of both.

You could define a URI attribute. This URI is the address of record for 
the user, and it represents the URI that would be used to subscribe to 
that user in the case of a buddy list subscription. If you had 
additional information about that user, for example, a pres URI, IM URI, 
or tel URI, you would include those as informational elements within the 
entry. So:

<entry uri="sip:[email-masked]">
   <im-uri>im:[email-masked]</im-uri>
   <phone-uri>tel:+17325551212</phone-uri>
   <display-name>Joe User</display-name>
</entry>

What I want to make sure of, is that the basic case which we are most 
concerned about (a single URI, used for list subscriptions), works well 
and efficiently, including the ad-hoc case.

Thanks,
Jonathan R.

---

From: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:04:48 +0300

Jonathan,

I think I had in my mind the URI representing the list and not each of 
the entries as I said in my previous e-mail, my apologies if I missled 
you. The URI representing the list is not visible in the schema (I 
believe), so my comment is not applicable.

Also, can you provide an example of the XML document? The draft does not 
contain any. This will help me in understanding the schema.

Thanks a lot,

       Miguel

Jonathan Rosenberg wrote:

>> the case when there are several URIs representing an entry, for 
>> instance a sip and press or im URIs.
> 
> 
>> If you represent the URI as an attribute then you can't have 
>> repetitions of the same attribute. However, if you represent the URI 
>> as an element you can have repetitions, for example:
>>
>> <entry>

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 08:22:34 -0400

> believe), so my comment is not applicable.

Currently, it is in the schema. Regarding issue 2, it would move to a 
separate document, with a separate schema, though it would still be a 
URI attribute (to allow it to be used as an index).

> contain any. This will help me in understanding the schema.

Sure. My apologies. I'll be doing a rev of that doc as soon as we settle 
on the issues, and I think we're just about there. Here is an example 
doc that is compliant to the current schema in -02:

<resource-lists xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:resource-lists"
xmlns:xcap="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xcap-must-understand"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
   <list name="friends" uri="sip:[email-masked]" subscribeable="true">
     <entry name="Bill" uri="sip:[email-masked]">
       <display-name>Bill Doe</display-name>
     </entry>
     <list name="close-friends" uri="sip:[email-masked]"
           subscribeable="true">
       <entry name="Joe" uri="sip:[email-masked]">
         <display-name>Joe Smith</display-name>
       </entry>
       <entry name="Nancy" uri="sip:[email-masked]">
         <display-name>Nancy Gross</display-name>
       </entry>
       <external>http://www.example.org/xcap/resource-lists/users/a/foo
          </external>
     </list>
   </list>
</resource-lists>

HTH,
Jonathan R.