RE: [ciq] requirements for the next version of xNL and xAL

[David RR Webber - XML ebusiness <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Max,

I've reviewed your "wants" list.

I agree with the overall objectives, and certainly we want the
new revision to be more customer friendly for both end users
and programmers.

What I'm also seeing is that the CAM TC work is a perfect
instrument for getting at a lot of what you want.

For instance - I think we could start with the USPS addressing,
and create a CAM template that manages the five formats
there, with business rules, and then tie those sweetly into
the xAL/xNL dictionary of field elements.

The template would be designed to be an "include", so it
can be re-used anywhere people want to insert the correct
address format based on context.

The big advantages of doing this IMHO is that you then have
a truely "pluggable" address format for USA addresses - and
you can then use that as a basis for demonstrating the approach.

As ever my only constraint here is time.  Next few weeks are
very busy preparing for ebXML/XML2002 London, and completing
work on OAGI BODs with CAM.

I know Joe Lubenow has done great work on the USPS formats,
in preparation for being able to script these.  Perhaps we could
start there and pick one of Joe's sets and try and use CAM/ xAL/xNL
to craft that?

Thanks, DW.