This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Use of UUIDs in II.extension"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
There are two views about whether it is appropriate to send a UUID (GUID) in the II.extension property: | There are two views about whether it is appropriate to send a UUID (GUID) in the II.extension property: | ||
| + | |||
1. It's perfectly ok. The II.root represents the assigning athority which provides semantic context for the UUID issued. | 1. It's perfectly ok. The II.root represents the assigning athority which provides semantic context for the UUID issued. | ||
| + | |||
2. It's not terribly appropriate and meaningless. The II.root is not intended to convey semantics, merely ensure uniqueness. UUIDs are already globally unique, so having a separate root is just extra overhead. All semantics are conveyed by other RIM attributes (e.g. Role.classCode, Role.code, Role.scoper, Act.clasCode, Act.code, Act.moodCode | 2. It's not terribly appropriate and meaningless. The II.root is not intended to convey semantics, merely ensure uniqueness. UUIDs are already globally unique, so having a separate root is just extra overhead. All semantics are conveyed by other RIM attributes (e.g. Role.classCode, Role.code, Role.scoper, Act.clasCode, Act.code, Act.moodCode | ||
So: which is it? | So: which is it? | ||
Revision as of 04:08, 2 June 2006
There are two views about whether it is appropriate to send a UUID (GUID) in the II.extension property:
1. It's perfectly ok. The II.root represents the assigning athority which provides semantic context for the UUID issued.
2. It's not terribly appropriate and meaningless. The II.root is not intended to convey semantics, merely ensure uniqueness. UUIDs are already globally unique, so having a separate root is just extra overhead. All semantics are conveyed by other RIM attributes (e.g. Role.classCode, Role.code, Role.scoper, Act.clasCode, Act.code, Act.moodCode
So: which is it?
