[apps-discuss] draft-nordman-classification (was: Minutes for AppsAWG and Apps Area General Session, IETF 82)

Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> Mon, 14 November 2011 10:10 UTC

Return-Path: <GK@ninebynine.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5120E21F8CBF for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:10:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.59
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.59 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.009, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r+BRirmFSB+Y for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:10:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay3.mail.ox.ac.uk (relay3.mail.ox.ac.uk []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 367B421F8E3E for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:02:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1.mail.ox.ac.uk ([]) by relay3.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from <GK@ninebynine.org>) id 1RPtMy-0007HZ-Ar for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:02:28 +0000
Received: from tinos.zoo.ox.ac.uk ([]) by smtp1.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <GK@ninebynine.org>) id 1RPtMy-00020C-4B for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:02:28 +0000
Message-ID: <4EC0D212.7010806@ninebynine.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 08:32:18 +0000
From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
References: <CALaySJ+vHnG1b-Lt_MmjgqPXLeREH01YW_H3LUxznkc2wCrOGA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJ+vHnG1b-Lt_MmjgqPXLeREH01YW_H3LUxznkc2wCrOGA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Oxford-Username: zool0635
Subject: [apps-discuss] draft-nordman-classification (was: Minutes for AppsAWG and Apps Area General Session, IETF 82)
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:10:32 -0000

On 14/11/2011 04:35, Barry Leiba wrote:
> I've posted minutes on the meeting materials site.  Find them here:
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/minutes/appsawg.txt

11:20 Basic Device Classification (Bruce Nordman) - 5 min

Looking for assitance/comment/collaboration.
Want to make a registry for generic device "names", as known by humans.
"computer", "projector", that sort of thing.
question about properties vs names, and what the use case is.
question about behaviour of devices, related to proerties vs names.
answer: Not addressing functional aspects of the devices.
question: Why is "what they are" useful?  Unclear on purpose.
CORE could use something like this, but needs *types*, rather than names.

My first thought was: "OMG, are the IETF going to do ontologies now?" :)

I'm ambivalent whether this activity is of value in an IETF context - I'm not 
seeing it yet.

But some thoughts did occur to me:
(1) the discussion may be not-unrelated to recent discussion of top level MIME 
types (font/*, etc.)
(2) there are some other past activities that could relate to this
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3458.txt - "Message Context"
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2506 - "Media features"