[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep-cc-review] Kickoff!
Joe, I say we get these upfront as requirements - not the other way around. There's too much potential for confusion here. We need to have this exact - and especially agree on terminology and intent. We need the XML serialization. The fact that XML serialization can point to other objects in other formats - such as UML modelling tool binaries, Word docs, HTML and more, is a registry functionality. XML is the baseline format - we provide that. If other people want to figure out how to store UML or EDI natively - that's their business not ours - and I'd say that is out-of-scope for the current RIM. BTW - notice there is strictly not an "UML representation". XMI is an XML syntax for exchange UML models as vector sets - and UML modelling tools have ability to save binaries of their models. We can store either as objects only, no ability to search or interprete semantics inside them. That's why we need the XML serialization to provide that. More especially - we need a simple and clear serialization, that people can understand and can populate readily. One of the biggest issues is that people simply do not understand what CCTS is - how to use it - and how it relates to their own world. Obviously now we have the CCTS tutorial to help guide that conceptual layer - but beyond that there is no way to relate that to the logical and physical layers except through applying the XML serialization. We could of course build that very simple box for CCTS based on their columns in their spreadsheet, I recall they have about 6 columns. That will take about 30 minutes to do in XML. If they want more than that - then we need to be able to clearly set out the requirements and then be given freedom to engineer a solution. DW. ===================================================== Message text written by "Chiusano Joseph" > I agree with Mark's statement. We are not insisting on XML, but rather creating an XML serialization for Core Components. Registry users should have the opportunity to store Core Components in an XML format or a UML format (or EDI, for that matter). The UML representations would simply be registered objects, with a type (using term generically) value of "UML" assigned to them. Similarly, XML representations would have a type value of "XML". This could be done through Slots, or through a classification scheme of Core Component representation types (and a classification of each Core Component according to that scheme). Let's ensure that we include all of these concepts in our final documentation. <
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]