[auscope-geosciml] Managing version numbers between GeoSciML packages [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Rob.Atkinson at csiro.au Rob.Atkinson at csiro.au
Wed Oct 27 18:35:46 EDT 2010


Independent versioning is indeed a motivation - it allows piecemeal updating - i.e. a propagation of changes out from the core to communities who can look after their own versioning cycles independently.

I think we do have to issue new versions to track changes in components - you will find that software development does this in practice - typically a new major version if some underlying technology component changes. 

If no semantic or syntactic changes occur - let us imagine an extension to the core model we dont use in borehole - we could generate a new schema that imports the new version.  This will probably invalidate instances however.

On the other hand, we might not need to update at all if the change doesnt affect us - but this itself is probably something that matters to users of the model/schema - i.e. we're not just behind the game, but know that we are interoperable with the new version. I dont have any ideas how one would declare this - i.e. an assertion that, for example, as far as borehole is concerned core 3.1.0 is the same as 3.0.0 and does not need updating. Tricky...

Maybe we mint a "null version" - a borehole 3.1.0 that just says use borehole 3.0.0 ? Or just imports it in its original namespace - so its an empty namespace and instances still work?

Gives an opportunity to whack in a nice big comment saying nothing needed to change.. 

Rob

________________________________________
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au [Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au]
Sent: Thursday, 28 October 2010 9:18 AM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: [auscope-geosciml] Managing version numbers between GeoSciML packages [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

A small technical question before I perform the EM surgery....

How do we manage relations between GeoSciML packages when their version numbers get out of sync?

For example, for release v3.0.0, all schemas will have pathnames like:

http://schema.geosciml.org/borehole/3.0.0/xsd/borehole.xsd
http://schema.geosciml.org/geosciml-core/3.0.0/xsd/geosciml-core.xsd etc, etc.

If I make a new version of geosciml-core, its new pathname will be http://schema.geosciml.org/geosciml-core/3.1.0/xsd/geosciml-core.xsd

Note that the borehole.xsd imports geosciml-core.xsd.  The new pathname for geosciml-core would mean that the current borehole schema (v3.0) would then not import the new geosciml-core schema (v3.1).

Would we also have to issue new v3.1 schemas for any package that imported geosciml-core (ie, geosciml.xsd, borehole.xsd, laboratoryAnalysis-Specimen.xsd)?

Or do we have to change our construction of pathnames for our schemas?

Am I missing something?

Ollie


-----Original Message-----
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Raymond Oliver
Sent: Thursday, 28 October 2010 8:46 AM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [auscope-geosciml] RE : RE : RE : RE : EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Eric,

My understanding is that the ability to independently develop parts of GeoSciML without having to re-issue the whole model was a key benefit of splitting the model into numerous packages.

Cheers,
Ollie

-----Original Message-----
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Boisvert, Eric
Sent: Thursday, 28 October 2010 8:40 AM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au; auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: [auscope-geosciml] RE : RE : RE : RE : EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Are you suggestion that having different namespaces for different packages will allow these to be versionned independently ?

That's an idea..

Eric

________________________________

De: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au de la part de Rob.Atkinson at csiro.au
Date: mer. 2010-10-27 17:32
À: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Objet : Re: [auscope-geosciml] RE : RE : RE : EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]



Governance is an aspect of an interoperability contract, as far as we are concerned - so a single authority may quite naturally have different sets of policies for different components - even components of the same type.  GeoSciML may have a core they maintain as stable and domain-specific extensions that are devolved to more active development teams.  Likewise, within the same set of policies, a different life-cycle status may apply. I'd characterise all of these as part of the governance aspect.

Whether this means we need different namespaces is I think bound up in versions - if we have versions in namespaces then by default we must have different namespaces for each application schema, since they may be versioned independently - or we lose the benefits of encapsulation.

As we move to a model and model-derived artefact repository that handles dependencies and versions we will need to start understanding and capturing a set of policies and lifecycle status around which a methodology can be matured.  Please send your suggestions in :-) In the meantime Simon is looking into this on behalf of ISO and I'm attempting to focus this around what can be automated and impacts the entire model-driven archtecture chain of dependencies.

Rob

________________________________
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Boisvert, Eric [Eric.Boisvert at RNCan-NRCan.gc.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, 27 October 2010 8:46 PM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: [auscope-geosciml] RE : RE : RE : EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

My understanding was that namespaces were also representing governance (in addition to preventing name clashes).  Is this suggesting that these part would/should be governed independently ? (ie, "let's outsource EarthMaterial")

Eric


________________________________
De: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au de la part de Rob.Atkinson at csiro.au
Date: mer. 2010-10-27 05:36
À: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Objet : Re: [auscope-geosciml] RE : RE : EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]


my understanding is its one namespace per application schema - but I know simon has looked into this in more detail and I'll bow to his superior knowledge.  I'm not convinced multiple namespaces is a problem.

I quite like looking at an element in instance document and being able to see the source of the relevant schema definition easily, but really tools should be able to cope either way.

Rob

________________________________________
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Boisvert, Eric [Eric.Boisvert at RNCan-NRCan.gc.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, 27 October 2010 8:30 PM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au; auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: [auscope-geosciml] RE :  RE :  EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

My point is that it can be done without having multiple namespaces, it just compartimentation of the xsd files structure in such a way that you can import a xsd while ignoring the others.

Or am I missing something again ?.


________________________________

De: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au de la part de Rob.Atkinson at csiro.au
Date: mer. 2010-10-27 05:20
À: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Objet : Re: [auscope-geosciml] RE : EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]



you can reuse part of a model (or a schema) without being affected by every change in any related part (encapsulation). Hopefuly we can get to the point where the core model is stable and we are adding new modules or improving specific aspects. This means namespaces - since we have one per application schema.

We will just need tools to help us building configurations - humans dont buold instances - so more namespaces isnt such a problem in reality is it?

Rob

________________________________
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Boisvert, Eric [Eric.Boisvert at RNCan-NRCan.gc.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, 27 October 2010 8:04 PM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: [auscope-geosciml] RE : EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

what's the benefit of having many namespaces again ?

________________________________
De: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au de la part de Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au
Date: mar. 2010-10-26 22:09
À: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Objet : [auscope-geosciml] EarthMaterial package [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi all,

The v3 RC2 model is on the verge of schema generation.

Simon mentioned in passing to me that we might consider extracting the EarthMaterial leaf package out of the quite large GeoSciML-Core package and into its own Application Schema.

As far as I can see, this would not introduce any dependency problems (GeoSciML-Core schema would just import the EarthMaterial schema), and it would be a fairly simple thing to implement even at this late stage in v3 RC2.

Could I get feedback from everyone about whether they think this is a good idea.

Thanks,
Ollie

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ollie Raymond

National Advice, Maps and Data Standards Project
Geoscience Australia

GeoSciML Design Group
IUGS Commission for the Management and Application of Geoscience Information
Interoperability Working Group

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Address: GPO Box 378, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia | ABN: 80 091 799 039
Ph: +61 2 62499575 | Fax: +61 2 62499992 | Email: Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au<mailto:Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au> | Google Map<http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=canberra+australia&ie=UTF8&ll=-35.344028,149.158362&spn=0.007684,0.016404&t=h&z=17&iwloc=addr&om=1>
National geological maps  http://www.ga.gov.au/minerals/research/national/nat_maps/nat_geol_maps.jsp
Geoscience Australia web services  http://www.ga.gov.au/resources/applications/ogc-wms.jsp
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 --- This message was created with 100% recycled electrons ---


_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml


_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml


_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml
_______________________________________________
auscope-geosciml mailing list
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml


More information about the GeoSciML mailing list