FW: (GJXDM) Re: Request for GJXDM technical assistance

["Aerts, John F." <jfaerts@lasd.org>]

FYI

-----Original Message-----
From: gjxdm@ojp.gov [mailto:gjxdm@ojp.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 3:12 AM
To: gjxdm@ojp.gov
Subject: (GJXDM) Re: Request for GJXDM technical assistance


 From: Mark T. Whitworth

First I'd like to say that I'd be very interested in how things are
progressing with the OXCI. Do you know of anyone participating from
Pennsylvania? I am currently looking to finish off the development of a
Court Filing interface for the PA District Justice System, but we are too
far in to take this specification into consideration. The good news is that
it is based on the GJXDM pre-release 3.0.0.0 schema, and includes an ebXML
envelope similar to the one described in your documentation. 

With regard to your questions:
1. I've written my own java object generator therefore I don't have the
issue you've run into. I do know that XML Spy will allow you to construct
schemas that include invalid restrictions. You might try ensuring that the
xerces parser will successfully validate the source schema, before running
it through the code generator.

2. Once again, I've written my own schema extraction tool to pull elements
and there entire hierarchy out of the GJXDM (or any other schema) into there
own schema as the base for a sub-set. The equivalent of this is a bit of
copy and paste from the GJXDM. From there I've added whatever additional
constraints were required manually. Adjusting minOccurs / maxOccurs and
eliminating unneeded elements. I'll email you the three schemas (document,
extension, sub-set) that make up our current Court Filing.

3. In coordination with the PA JNET group, I've put together some
recommendations on one way of addressing this. They should be posted to the
Listserv sometime this week. I believe that it also covers many of the
concerns outlined in Gary Poindexter's response to this topic as well. It
boils down to a more basic core GJXDM, and adding flexibility to the
sub-setting process. From my perspective the GJXDM sub-setting approach is
the way to go, if they can address 3 or 4 core issues.  Especially if your
going to be defining another specification that is reliant on the GJXDM. 

Mark T. Whitworth
Senior Software Consultant
Ajilon Consuling
717-795-2000 ext:3155
Mark.Whitworth@pacourts.us