| RE: [higgins-dev] What defines the Higgins data model? |
|
Jim, I think there *is* interest in “determining an authoritative
data model source”, and in fact in the whole topic. I for one am vitally
interested, and would like to see constant improvement in the documentation of
the Higgins data model, since it is essential to the success of Higgins as
whole. I know Paul and Markus and I have a deep interest in the topic as I’ve
been working with the two of them and others on the XDI TC to map Higgins data
model to the XDI RDF data model (initially documented at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/25531/xdi-rdf-model-v7.pdf
-- better documentation coming soon). Doing a completely clean mapping is
the easiest way to enable Higgins to speak XDI and vice versa. We plan to give
a presentation at the F2F on this. I talked to Paul earlier today and he
apologized for being snowed under and said he would be getting to this thread
as soon as he can. In my own review of the http://wiki.eclipse.org/Higgins_Data_Model
section of the Higgins wiki, I’ve found the typical situation with a
fast-moving technical wiki: some pages are great, most are average, and some
are just confusing deadwood. It’s often easier for a newcomer like me to
see that – once you get “into the flow” of the wiki you tend
to concentrate on the new stuff and ignore the older cruft. So leading up to (and after) the F2F, I’d
be happy to volunteer to help garden the http://wiki.eclipse.org/Higgins_Data_Model
section of the wiki to see if we can’t turn it into accurate, up-to-date documentation
of the current state of the data model and clear assessment of all open issues. =Drummond From:
higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Sermersheim ok,
well there doesn't seem to be a swelling interest in determining an
authoritative data model source. I guess these emails will be come that
for now. I'll
spawn new threads for the different topics we're discussing in hopes that we
can progress. Jim |