password
username
Sponsored by CakeMail, an email marketing software.
Newsletter preview


XML Daily Newslink. Wednesday, 18 June 2008
A Cover Pages Publication http://xml.coverpages.org/
Provided by OASIS http://www.oasis-open.org
Edited by Robin Cover

====================================================
This issue of XML Daily Newslink is sponsored by
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://sun.com
====================================================

HEADLINES:

* Design and Customize XForms in OpenOffice
* David Nuescheler on JCR and REST
* Attention Request (POKE) for Instant Messaging
* XHTML 1.1 Basic and Modularization Published as Proposed Recommendations
* Public Review Drafts for OASIS Web Services Transaction Specifications
* Airlines Say They Lack the IT for US-VISIT
* Sir Tim Talks Up Linked Open Data Movement
* The Web Time Forgot

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

Design and Customize XForms in OpenOffice
Bryan Rasmussen, DevX.com

"Most developers have heard of XForms as an XML-based forms language
meant to replace traditional HTML Forms. This is essentially correct:
XForms was created as the next generation version of HTML forms -- but
the design goals are such that they can be implemented as forms in
environments other than the web browser. One such environment is your
typical office application. XForms is implemented as one possible
method of doing forms-based applications in OpenOffice or Sun's
StarOffice. The XForm discussed in this article has been tested on
both a Microsoft Windows XP installation, and a Xandros Linux
installation. The article presents an overview of how to design an
OpenOffice form as an end-user, and provides the syntax for making an
OpenOffice XForm match a required XML output format. It assumes that
the reader has at least a simple knowledge of XML, XPath, and XML
Schema; to follow along or use the downloadable code, you should have
OpenOffice version 2.4 or higher installed... The XForms in OpenOffice
implementation focuses on simple forms that end users can design
themselves. This article provides a limited example of how an end user
could use OpenOffice's design mode to build a form, including discussions
of the XForms syntax, and common problems that users may encounter. You
need an XML format for the form. The example discussed here uses a
Danish governmental format that represents the data for a single postal
address (only the address, not such extraneous information as the
identity of whoever resides there) with additional constructs specific
to Denmark. This format makes a decent example because it is simple
enough to be comprehensible, yet real-world enough to be potentially
useful... XForms in OpenOffice are analogous to the common MVC
architecture: the Model is the XForm Model, the View is the rendered
form fields, and the control is OpenOffice Forms. Note that the
OpenOffice Forms Namespace abstractly describes a form and its properties
-- the actual forms input portion of the XForms specification is not
implemented. This varies from the XHTML model of XForms, because there's
no clear analog to the Controller in that model..." [Note: Bryan
Rasmussen is responsible for Core XML and Web technologies within the
Danish Government's Data Standardization Project OIOXML.]

http://www.devx.com/opensource/Article/38178
See also XML and Forms: http://xml.coverpages.org/xmlForms.html

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

David Nuescheler on JCR and REST
Stefan Tilkov, InfoQueue

David Nuescheler is the specification lead on JSR 170 and JSR 283,
Content Repository for Java Technology API. His group has been working
for over four years to standardize the content repository market. David
is also a committer on the Apache Jackrabbit Project and a member of
the Apache Software Foundation. Excerpts from the interview about JCR
[JSR 170: Content Repository for Java Technology API]: "A Content
Repository as the best of both worlds from relational databases and
filesystems, plus all the good stuff that we always missed and had to
build into our own applications. This includes things like transactions,
scalability, query on the DB side, being really good with very large
files, streaming, access controls and hierarchies on the filesystem
side and things like versioning, fulltext search and most importantly
a 'data first' approach which neither of the two support. JCR is a
Java API describing all these features... I am excited that I am aware
of over a dozen of repositories that are compliant with JCR v1.0
(aka JSR-170) only two years after the initial release of JCR. As
expected some repositories are compliant through third party connectors
but the majority already shipping JCR compliance out of the box. This
includes the major repository vendors as well as young and innovative
new repositories. [As to claims that Atom and AtomPub compete with or
obsolete JCR] "Frankly, I still have a hard time understanding why
people think that protocols and API's are competing. I remember back in
the days when people compared WebDAV and JCR (which btw I think is a
much more appropriate comparison from a feature set perspective) we
drew the comparison to HTTP and the Servlet API. You wouldn't see
anybody saying things like 'Now I have HTTP, why do I need the Servlet
API'. Programmers use APIs not protocols... comparing Atom and AtomPub
to JCR is a bit of joke from a functional perspective. While Atom and
AtomPub offer reading and writing JCR certainly goes beyond that in many
different ways (Search, Locking, Versioning, Access Control..). From a
technology perspective I think Atom and AtomPub are a more light-weight
(probably needed) replacement for the WebDAV collections handling, but
that's about it..." [As to REST] "In my mind JCR and REST are related
in various different ways. First of all they both are information
centric and support hierarchical addressing of the information. So the
JCR paths map very intuitively to URLs just like paths in filesystems.
One of the first exercises we went through was to map all the JCR API
calls to WebDAV to offer a complete remoting of the JCR API in a
RESTFul manner. This was not only important to be sure that we are
aligned with WebDAV from a feature perspective but also manifest that
we did not violate any of the constraints imposed by the REST
architecture style..."

http://www.infoq.com/articles/nuescheler-jcr-rest

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

Attention Request (POKE) for Instant Messaging
Gustavo Garcia and Jose-Luis Martin (eds), IETF Internet Draft

Members of the IETF SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging
Extensions (SIMPLE) Working Group have released an -00 level Internet
Draft for a specification "Attention Request (POKE) for Instant
Messaging." Some existing messaging platforms include the capability
to send a message to a user requesting his attention. For example,
XEP-0224: "Attention." This feature is usually known as poke, nudge or
buzz, and in desktop applications the notification is usually implemented
using a combination of sound and the vibration of chat windows. This
Internet Draft document specifies a message content type and XML format
to request attention from a targeted user. This feature is usually known
as poke, nudge or buzz in existing messaging platforms. Its primary use
is as an additional instant messaging capability that can be sent in
the middle of a instant messaging session or in a standalone message at
any time. This message also allows the sender to indicate the preferred
realization of the attention request: vibrator, light, tone, media or
text... The poke message can be used inside an instant messaging session
(for example a MSRP session) or as a standalone message (for example in
a SIP message). In session mode, the poke message is sent as part of
the messaging stream and its usage is negotiated just like any other
media type in that stream, with details depending on the session mode
protocol. In the poke message the sender can include the preference for
the realization of the attention request in the receiving side: vibrator,
light, tone, media or text. This is just an indication and the final
decission of the realization is in the receiver depending on the terminal
capabilities and the user configuration. A poke message can include more
than one realization to define complex patterns (e.g. light + vibrator).
The receiver should start all the realizations (from the beginning and
following the order in the XML document) in parallel until it finds one
marked as "waitForPrevious". When that mark is found the receiver should
wait until the end of all the previous realization before starting this
realization and next ones... The vibrator realization could be implemented
using a mechanical vibration or software vibration of the user interface.
The parameters of this realization are the duration, frequency and
intensity...

http://xml.coverpages.org/draft-garcia-simple-poke-00.txt
See also the IETF (SIMPLE) Working Group Status Pages: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/simple/

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

XHTML 1.1 Basic and Modularization Published as Proposed Recommendations
Daniel Austin, Shane McCarron (et al, eds), W3C Technical Reports

W3C annnounced that the XHTML2 Working Group has published two Proposed
Recommendations: "XHTML Modularization 1.1" and "XHTML Basic 1.1."
Feedback from implementations is invited. The Modularization specification
presents version 1.1 of XHTML Modularization, an abstract modularization
of XHTML and implementations of the abstraction using XML Document Type
Definitions (DTDs) and XML Schemas. This modularization provides a means
for subsetting and extending XHTML, a feature needed for extending XHTML's
reach onto emerging platforms. This specification is intended for use by
language designers as they construct new XHTML Family Markup Languages.
This specification does not define the semantics of elements and attributes,
only how those elements and attributes are assembled into modules, and
from those modules into markup languages. This second version of this
specification includes several minor updates to provide clarifications
and address errors found in the first version. It also provides an
implementation using XML Schemas. "XHTML Basic 1.1": The XHTML Basic
document type includes the minimal set of modules required to be an XHTML
host language document type, and in addition it includes images, forms,
basic tables, and object support. It is designed for Web clients that do
not support the full set of XHTML features; for example, Web clients such
as mobile phones, PDAs, pagers, and settop boxes. The document type is
rich enough for content authoring. XHTML Basic is designed as a common
base that may be extended. The goal of XHTML Basic is to serve as a common
language supported by various kinds of user agents. This version of XHTML
Basic, which uses the Modularization approach, has been brought into
alignment with the widely deployed XHTML Mobile Profile from the Open
Mobile Alliance (OMA).

http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/PR-xhtml-modularization-20080611/
See also XHTML Basic 1.1: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/PR-xhtml-basic-20080611/

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

Public Review Drafts for OASIS Web Services Transaction Specifications
Staff, OASIS Announcement

OASIS announced the publication of three Public Review Drafts produced
by members of the Web Services Transaction (WS-TX) Technical Committee.
The PR drafts are open for comment through August 12, 2008. Most
changes are relatively minor, including updated references and the
addition of conformance sections. (1) "Web Services Atomic Transaction
(WS-AtomicTransaction) Version 1.2" provides the definition of the
Atomic Transaction coordination type that is to be used with the
extensible coordination framework described in WS-Coordination. This
specification defines three specific agreement coordination protocols
for the Atomic Transaction coordination type: completion, volatile
two-phase commit, and durable two-phase commit. Developers can use any
or all of these protocols when building applications that require
consistent agreement on the outcome of short-lived distributed activities
that have the all-or-nothing property. (2) "Web Services Business Activity
(WS-BusinessActivity) Version 1.2" rovides the definition of two
Business Activity coordination types: AtomicOutcome or MixedOutcome,
that are to be used with the extensible coordination framework described
in the WS-Coordination specification. This specification also defines
two specific Business Activity agreement coordination protocols for the
Business Activity coordination types:
BusinessAgreementWithParticipantCompletion, and
BusinessAgreementWithCoordinatorCompletion. Developers can use these
protocols when building applications that require consistent agreement
on the outcome of long-running distributed activities. (3) "Web Services
Coordination (WS-Coordination) Version 1.2" describes an extensible
framework for providing protocols that coordinate the actions of
distributed applications. Such coordination protocols are used to
support a number of applications, including those that need to reach
consistent agreement on the outcome of distributed activities. The
framework defined in this specification enables an application service
to create a context needed to propagate an activity to other services
and to register for coordination protocols. The framework enables
existing transaction processing, workflow, and other systems for
coordination to hide their proprietary protocols and to operate in a
heterogeneous environment. Additionally the specification describes a
definition of the structure of context and the requirements for
propagating context between cooperating services.

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-tx/wstx-wsat-1.2-spec-pr-01/wstx-wsat-1.2-spec-pr-01.html
See also the announcement: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200806/msg00011.html

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

Airlines Say They Lack the IT for US-VISIT
Ben Bain, Federal Computer Week

Ken Dunlap, the International Air Transport Association's director of
security for North America, argued in a public hearing that airlines
lack the information technology infrastructure needed to comply with
a Homeland Security Department proposal which would put carriers in
charge of collecting biometric information from most foreign travelers
when they leave the United States. He said the DHS proposed rule that
would place the airlines in charge of collecting certain travelers
fingerprints completely ignores the existing IT infrastructure of the
industry... airlines did not have the bandwidth to transmit even the
low-resolution fingerprints and that IT infrastructure upgrades could
take seven months with some airlines having to make significant changes...
Dunlap, whose association represents 230 airlines from around the world,
made the comments today at a public hearing on DHS' proposed plan for
meeting a congressional mandate that requires DHS to expand the U.S.
Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT). A law
requires the department to also collect biometric information from
non-immigrant travelers as they leave the country. DHS has already
been collecting biometric data from such travelers when they arrive in
the United States. DHS would use the biometric data collected by the
airlines to create an exit record and verify the identity of the traveler
against entry data stored in DHS' Automated Biometric Identification
System and the Arrival and Departure Information System. The airlines
would send the biometric data in a message formatted in Extensible
Markup Language (XML) which would contain a biometric image along with
biographic data such as the person's first and last names, date of birth,
and the date and time the fingerprints were taken. Dunlap claimed that
if the proposed biometrics were required, data would amount to 128
megabytes for high resolution of data sent per flight... None of the
airlines' data networks could handle that [and] "there is no XML
standard for the industry".

http://www.fcw.com/online/news/152835-1.html

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

Sir Tim Talks Up Linked Open Data Movement
Erin Joyce: InternetNews.com

Data isn't worth much until it's free -- freed from the silo it's locked
up in, and used in a mashup that creates valuable new resources for you
and others. Freeing data is also behind a fast-growing movement around
Linked Open Data - or what many call Web 3.0 for short, said the founder
of the World Wide Web. During a keynote address at the Linked Data
P***t conference here, Sir Tim Berners-Lee stumped for the next vision
of the Web -- dubbed Web 3.0 -- and the linked open data movement that
is behind the forming Semantic Web. "Linked open data is a movement,"
he said. "It's a movement that has taken off internationally; it's a
grass roots movement, and it's about information that is free to use in
the Linked Data format." This doesn't mean all data should and will be
free -- you decide what's open and in the public realm and what stays
behind a firewall, he stressed. But the decision not to trade data should
be because you don't want to, and not because your data just doesn't
understand the other party's. That's the fundamental part of the Linked
Open Data movement he discussed with attendees at the conference, which
was sponsored by Jupitermedia, the parent company of this site. Web 3.0,
Semantic Web -- even Linked Data, is "about simple ideas that make the
Web work and using them for data. But it's about getting one format
across applications so the Semantic Web standards enable me looking at
my bank statement. Now I can drop that into my calendar and do something
with it..."

http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3753646/Sir+Tim+Talks+Up+Linked+Open+Data+Movement.htm
See also the abstract: http://www.linkeddatap***t.com/conference/keynotes.php#528

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

The Web Time Forgot
Alex Wright, NY Times

On a fog-drizzled Monday afternoon, this fading medieval city feels
like a forgotten place. Apart from the obligatory Gothic cathedral,
there is not much to see here except for a tiny storefront museum called
the Mundaneum, tucked down a narrow street in the northeast corner of
town. It feels like a fittingly secluded home for the legacy of one of
technology's lost pioneers: Paul Otlet. In 1934, Otlet sketched out
plans for a global network of computers (or 'electric telescopes,' as
he called them) that would allow people to search and browse through
millions of interlinked documents, images, audio and video files. He
described how people would use the devices to send messages to one
another, share files and even congregate in online social networks.
He called the whole thing a 'reseau,' which might be translated as
'network' -- or arguably, 'web.' Historians typically trace the
origins of the World Wide Web through a lineage of Anglo-American
inventors like Vannevar Bush, Doug Engelbart and Ted Nelson. But more
than half a century before Tim Berners-Lee released the first Web
browser in 1991, Otlet (pronounced ot-LAY) described a networked world
where "anyone in his armchair would be able to contemplate the whole
of creation." Although Otlet's proto-Web relied on a patchwork of
analog technologies like index cards and telegraph machines, it
nonetheless anticipated the hyperlinked structure of today's Web...
Otlet's vision hinged on the idea of a networked machine that joined
documents using symbolic links. While that notion may seem obvious
today, in 1934 it marked a conceptual breakthrough. "The hyperlink is
one of the most underappreciated inventions of the last century," Mr.
Kelly said. "It will go down with radio in the pantheon of great
inventions." [...] Since there was no such thing as electronic data
storage in the 1920s, Otlet had to invent it. He started writing at
length about the possibility of electronic media storage, culminating
in a 1934 book, 'Monde,' where he laid out his vision of a 'mechanical,
collective brain' that would house all the world's information, made
readily accessible over a global telecommunications network... Some
scholars believe Otlet also foresaw something like the Semantic Web,
the emerging framework for subject-centric computing that has been
gaining traction among computer scientists like Mr. Berners-Lee. Like
the Semantic Web, the Mundaneum aspired not just to draw static links
between documents, but also to map out conceptual relationships between
facts and ideas...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/science/17mund.html

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

XML Daily Newslink and Cover Pages are sponsored by:

BEA Systems, Inc. http://www.bea.com
IBM Corporation http://www.ibm.com
Primeton http://www.primeton.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://sun.com

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

XML Daily Newslink: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletter.html
Newsletter archive: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletterArchive.html
Newsletter subscribe: newsletter-subscribe@xml.coverpages.org
Newsletter ***: newsletter-***@xml.coverpages.org
Newsletter help: newsletter-help@xml.coverpages.org
Cover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/

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