Re: [ebxml-bp] 2/2/2004: Evolving Versioning Requirements - Work Item 7

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Monica.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record,
or a bag of nails and a hammer - the idea
of creating a CAM template as a reference
structure for the  XSD of BPSS would work
here.

Again this was discussed in the XMLWG meeting
on the 21st - that XSD only gives you one measure
of specificity - and that by using a CAM template
you can capture a raft of additional semantics and
rules about the BPSS itself.

This is of course a completely separate use case
by itself.  Using CAM to document the nuances
of a schema - for which CAM is intrinsically
designed to do.

I'm not looking for nails here - but this one
does rather stick out!

Cheers, DW.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
To: "ebXML BP" <ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 2:18 PM
Subject: [ebxml-bp] 2/2/2004: Evolving Versioning Requirements - Work Item 7


> Discussion|oasis.ebBP;
> Topic|Work Item 7 Versioning;
> Point|Requirements identification;
> mm1@
> Kenji:
> We discussed last week about versioning.  It appears we have a few
> evolving requirements related to versioning, and our work may complement:
>
>     * To identify and make available key BPSS elements
>     * To support the identification of the process description
>       (specification)
>     * To support the identification of the computable process
>       description (schema)
>     * To support any alignment to the ebXML set of specifications
>
> I'd encourage others to comment or revise above.
> Thanks.
> @mm1
>
>
>
>
>