Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-deltacloud-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-deltacloud-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0D4FB758E for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 17:00:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 2712 invoked by uid 500); 3 Nov 2011 17:00:11 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-deltacloud-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 2694 invoked by uid 500); 3 Nov 2011 17:00:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact deltacloud-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: deltacloud-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list deltacloud-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 2686 invoked by uid 99); 3 Nov 2011 17:00:11 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:00:11 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of dug@us.ibm.com designates 32.97.110.153 as permitted sender) Received: from [32.97.110.153] (HELO e35.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.153) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:00:01 +0000 Received: from /spool/local by e35.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:54:13 -0600 Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com ([9.17.195.106]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com ([192.168.1.135]) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:53:33 -0600 Received: from d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (d03av05.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.85]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id pA3GrFsW074828 for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:53:19 -0600 Received: from d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id pA3GrCT0032575 for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:53:13 -0600 Received: from d03nm119.boulder.ibm.com (d03nm119.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.145]) by d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id pA3GqOSv029494; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:52:24 -0600 In-Reply-To: <1320338196.13424.14.camel@melon.watzmann.net> To: David Lutterkort Cc: deltacloud-dev@incubator.apache.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sketch of CIMI model layer X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0 HF144 February 01, 2006 From: Doug Davis Message-ID: Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 12:52:20 -0400 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM119/03/M/IBM(Release 8.5.1FP2|March 17, 2010) at 11/03/2011 10:52:24, Serialize complete at 11/03/2011 10:52:24 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 005CAEC98525793D_=" x-cbid: 11110316-6148-0000-0000-000000EBF82B X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --=_alternative 005CAEC98525793D_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" David Lutterkort wrote on 11/03/2011 12:36:35 PM: ... > > The issue really isn't so much that there is this small difference > between JSON and XML, but that the rules for the JSON/XML correspondence > aren't spelled out. Sections 4.1.9 and 4.1.10 in the WIP talk a little > bit about that, but a slightly more formal (structural induction or so) > set of rules would definitely ease the mind of any implementor. BTW, > 4.1.10 contradicts the examples later on, like the one on page 37 for a > MachineTemplate - 4.1.10 talks about a wrapper property, whereas the > examples don't have one. can you elaborate on the mismatch between 4.1.10 and MachineTemplate? Which part of MachineTemplate is missing a wrapper? I'd like to fix it. -Doug --=_alternative 005CAEC98525793D_=--