MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
ubl message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl] UUID and GUID
I think we should distinguish between UUID as a term and UUID as a
standard for creating unique identifiers. That is, keep structure
separate from content.
We are specifying that certain components contain a unique identifier -
we did not mean to specify what form that identifier should take. If
some implementers use ISO and some use IETF and others ITU that is their
call.
With regard to terminology I suspect it may be better to call this
component Unique Identifier or UID and avoid the "is this a UUID or
GUID?" argument.
jon.bosak@sun.com wrote:
>Hello UBL TC,
>
>At the Manhattan UBL TC meeting, I took the AI to check on UUID
>vs. GUID and figure out which of these was proprietary.
>
>The answer to that question is: GUID is a proprietary Microsoft
>implementation of UUID. We can't be referencing proprietary
>specifications here, so we have to use UUID. (The OASIS ebXML
>Registry Standard has always used UUID, by the way.)
>Consequently, we will have to change all occurrences of GUID in
>the schemas to UUID. I'll enter this in the issues list once we
>settle on a UUID reference.
>
>The reference question is not as simple as one would hope. For
>background, see the Wikipedia entry on UUID. Here's my take after
>reading that article and doing a little bit of checking around:
>
> - The original 1997 UUID spec from The Open Group is not what we
> want, despite the fact that this is the spec referenced in ebRR
> 3.0 as
>
> [UUID] DCE 128 bit Universal Unique Identifier
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009629399/apdxa.htm#tagcjh_20
>
> - Possible UUID specs include:
>
> - ISO/IEC 11578:1996, which is not freely available online
>
> - IETF RFC 4122, which is available at
>
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4122.txt
> http://www.rfc-archive.org/getrfc.php?rfc=4122
> ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4122.txt
>
> - ITU-T Rec. X.667 (2004) | ISO/IEC 9834-8:2005, which is
> based on RFC 4122 and can be found in "prepublished" form at
>
> http://asn1.elibel.tm.fr/en/tools/oid/standards.htm
> http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/X.667.pdf
>
>Ordinarily I would go with the RFC simply because it's freely
>available. However, the ITU-T/ISO/IEC spec is also freely
>available as an exception to the usual rule, and I'm informed that
>an agreement between ITU and ISO will keep it that way. So my
>recommendation is to reference that one unless someone sees a
>reason not to.
>
>Please post any thoughts you might have on this, and let's aim to
>resolve the issue in next week's Atlantic TC call.
>
>Jon
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
>at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
--
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228
postal: po box 1289 fremantle western australia 6160
DOCUMENT ENGINEERING: Analyzing and Designing Documents for Business Informatics and Web Services
http://www.docengineering.com/
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]