Re: CIQ Specifications & XLink

["Ram Kumar" <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>]

Dear Michael,

It will be great if you can some of your experiences in using CIQ V3.0
and any issues (other than xlink) that you cme across and you think
should be improved/considered. V r constantly looking for feedback.

Thanks

Regards,

Ram

On 8/11/06, michael.blaim@kremsresearch.at
<michael.blaim@kremsresearch.at> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr Kumar,
>
> We are currently working on an XML specification for customer (party)
> information for travel and tourism with special focus on data protection and
> security. We use xNL, xAL (v3.0) and xCRL (v2.0, but we are looking forward
> to v3.0). These specifications really meet our requirements (flexibility,
> scalability, granularity etc) so far. The one thing we are not sure of is
> the XLink references. Although XLink is ideal for XML references in theory
> we can't find a way to put it into practice (with processors, parsers etc).
> So what is the reason for CIQ TC to use XLink?
>
> Best regards
> Michael Blaim
>
> Research Fellow
> Tourisms Research Center Krems
> Hofrat Erben Str 4
> 3500 Krems
> Austria
> phone: +43 2732 72177 25
> fax: +43 2732 72177 21
> mail: michael.blaim@kremsresearch.at
> web: http://www.kremsresearch.at
>
> anet - austrian network for e-tourism
> http://www.anet-network.at
>
>
>