Re: Agenda item: XSD and DTD for CPP/CPA

[James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@mmiec.com>]

At 12:58 PM 7/20/01, Martin W Sachs wrote:
>Jamie,
>
>I'm not sure that the problem you pose is relevant to the CPA.  In July,
>2001, no one is likely to have a collection of legacy CPA DTDs that can't
>be migrated.

Didn't mean to suggest there was a legacy base of CPAs out there.  (If only!)
Rather, only that end-users conceptualize in DTDs more readily right now.
I suppose my underlying assumptions are that, out in SME land where we
are hoping for adoption, the early adopters
    (1)  do more testing with handwritten code samples,
    (2)  are more accustomed to DTDs, and less to schema,
    (3)  are more hesitant about automated transformations, and pre-fab
solution sets, and
    (4)  want more acutely to "see with their own eyes" that the XML
actually implements the functionalities they expect,
    than you may think.

Another way of putting this is that, in my view, the CPP work shares BPSS's 
burden of having to be *extraordinarily* transparent and reader-accessible 
to non-experts, in order for users to repose in it the tremendous amount of 
confidence necessary to wire up their ERP  front ends and let 'er 
rip.  Most of the people who will be asked "is this really safe" by a CFO 
aren't at EDIFECS or IBM, they're local folks with lower skill sets.  In 
July 2001 I think this motley constituency is more likely to be comfortable 
reading DTDs.  So I would consider shipping both for a while.  Maybe in a 
year this issue goes away.

Best regards   Jamie

>