>>> Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@suse.de> schrieb am 07.07.2011 um 12:49 in Nachricht
<20110707104911.GK8084@suse.de>:
> On 2011-07-07T08:54:05, Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
>
> > However the "resource-agent" does not allow multiple descriptions:
> > <!ELEMENT resource-agent (version,longdesc,shortdesc,parameters?,actions) >
>
> Good spotting, it should.
>
> > Now how would one actually select a language? The RA will always return the
> same metadata.
>
> Return descriptions in all languages. The RA is not supposed to select
> that; the UI parsing the metadata will.
>
> > A personal thing I don't like is that "shortdesc" comes after "longdesc".
> Usually a heading comes before the body text, and I feel like that for
> shortdesc and longdesc.
>
> The ordering actually shouldn't matter; the format ought to allow both
> and multiple of them. That's a bit simpler to describe with a schema
> than a DTD.
With the DTD the ordering seems to matter. I'm no specialist on that, but for SGML something like "+(a,b,c)" exists to allow a, b, and c in any order (I think).
>
> > For "type (string|integer|boolean|time)" I feel the DTD should have
> > some comments on how "boolean" and "time" will be actually presented.
>
> Yes. We're working on including more types, and being more clear about
> what they mean. Besides the obvious, are there other types you think
> would be wortwhile?
Assuming "time" actually means "duration", I had to use a "user_id" in my RA. So maybe "uid" and "gid" could be valid types. Would be more specific that "string", possibly allowing IDs per name or numeric ID. In some cases "floats" or "fractionals" could make sense (e.g. when the RA is not written as a shell script).
>
> > There should be a comment in the DTD on:
> > <!ATTLIST action
> > name
> (start|stop|recover|monitor|restart|migrate_to|migrate_from|promote
> > |demote|notify|status|reload|meta-data|usage|methods|validate-all) #REQUIRED
> >
> > stating which methods are actually required.
>
> That does not belong in the syntax definition; none of them are _needed_
> to be described. (Only then should that be stated.) The schema is a
> syntax description for the metadata, not a full semantic definition; nor
> a full description of how RAs behave.
I wondered whether you outl put the OPTIONAL and REQUIRED in the DTD, but had no idea (other than adding comments).
Regards,
Ulrich
_______________________________________________
ha-wg-technical mailing list
ha-wg-technical@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-wg-technical
<20110707104911.GK8084@suse.de>:
> On 2011-07-07T08:54:05, Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
>
> > However the "resource-agent" does not allow multiple descriptions:
> > <!ELEMENT resource-agent (version,longdesc,shortdesc,parameters?,actions) >
>
> Good spotting, it should.
>
> > Now how would one actually select a language? The RA will always return the
> same metadata.
>
> Return descriptions in all languages. The RA is not supposed to select
> that; the UI parsing the metadata will.
>
> > A personal thing I don't like is that "shortdesc" comes after "longdesc".
> Usually a heading comes before the body text, and I feel like that for
> shortdesc and longdesc.
>
> The ordering actually shouldn't matter; the format ought to allow both
> and multiple of them. That's a bit simpler to describe with a schema
> than a DTD.
With the DTD the ordering seems to matter. I'm no specialist on that, but for SGML something like "+(a,b,c)" exists to allow a, b, and c in any order (I think).
>
> > For "type (string|integer|boolean|time)" I feel the DTD should have
> > some comments on how "boolean" and "time" will be actually presented.
>
> Yes. We're working on including more types, and being more clear about
> what they mean. Besides the obvious, are there other types you think
> would be wortwhile?
Assuming "time" actually means "duration", I had to use a "user_id" in my RA. So maybe "uid" and "gid" could be valid types. Would be more specific that "string", possibly allowing IDs per name or numeric ID. In some cases "floats" or "fractionals" could make sense (e.g. when the RA is not written as a shell script).
>
> > There should be a comment in the DTD on:
> > <!ATTLIST action
> > name
> (start|stop|recover|monitor|restart|migrate_to|migrate_from|promote
> > |demote|notify|status|reload|meta-data|usage|methods|validate-all) #REQUIRED
> >
> > stating which methods are actually required.
>
> That does not belong in the syntax definition; none of them are _needed_
> to be described. (Only then should that be stated.) The schema is a
> syntax description for the metadata, not a full semantic definition; nor
> a full description of how RAs behave.
I wondered whether you outl put the OPTIONAL and REQUIRED in the DTD, but had no idea (other than adding comments).
Regards,
Ulrich
_______________________________________________
ha-wg-technical mailing list
ha-wg-technical@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-wg-technical