TF-EMC2

Report on the SCHAC initiative

TF-EMC2 Poznan, 5 June 2005

Report on the SCHAC initiative

SCHACThe beginning

●A Committee inside TF-EMC2 to define and promote a common schema● Contributing attributes and expertise● Avoid reiventing the wheel in several shapes

●Build an initial kernel from already existing local attributes● Agreement on syntax and semantics● Allocation to object classes

●Make the kernel evolve via a collaborative approach● Propose a new attribute/class● Period of comments by the rest of the group● Different voting rules for

●Classes●Attributes●MAY or MUST definitions

Report on the SCHAC initiative

SCHACSCHema for ACademia

●The results of the SCHAC group●Not only oriented to directories

● Trying to build a neutral schema: LDAP, XML...

●The main goal is interinstitutional data exchange● Not pretending to substitute any existing schema● Coding rules taking into account schema idiosyncracies

●Applicable to different domains● eduRoam, GEANT2, Grids● ECTS● Cotswolds Group, LoF● ECTS

Report on the SCHAC initiative

Current status

●RC1 of individual attribute definitions sent to the group● Attribute names, syntax and semantics● Extension of eduPerson (and naturalPerson?)● Based on the synchornization of attributes in schemas from

●Croatia (hrEdu)●Finland (funetEdu)●France (supAnn)●Norway/Sweden (norEdu)●Poland (plEdu)●Spain (iris)●Switzerland (swissEdu)

Report on the SCHAC initiative

Open issues

●The naturalPerson question●The URN dilemma

● Whether to use URNs for encoding●Relationships with other entities (specially if they can be multiple)●Values with local properties (instead of agreed controlled vocabularies)

● Pros●Can act as controlled vocabularies●Resolvers can provide a level of additional flexibility●Delegation made them flexible with respect to local requirements●Better evolution with respect to versioning

● Cons●Require careful namespace allocation●Need for parsers/resolvers/registers/...●Risk of partitioning the semantic space