Re: [regrep] Implementing CCTS in Registry - further thoughts

[Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

I see this as a key decision to be made before proceeding too far ahead
- that is, how much (and which) of the metadata prescribed in the CC
spec should be represented as Registry metadata, and how much/which
should be "coupled" with the representation of the Core Component
entity.  One example would be a Core Component vs. BIE - should there be
a registry metadata attribute (intrinsic or slot, whichever we finally
decide on) called "EntityType" (or something similar) with values of
"CC", "BIE", etc., or should this metadata be indicated within the
serialization of the Core Component (by an EntityType tag, for example)
with the registry considering it a "generic" Core Component entity?  

Of course, there would be ramifications for querying - will queries have
to get down into the content to find matches on certain parameters, vs.
querying the registry metadata.

- Joe

Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
> 
> I think the best approach would be to define a generic XML structure to
> house the component, with some sort of indication saying "this core
> component is  atomic", or "this core component is a compount component,
> made up of | derived from |etc ...".
> 
> Haven't spent time on CCTS, but we may even be able to layer a namespace
> onto RELAX-NG or W3C schema to serialize a component...
> 
> -matt
> 
> Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> 
> >Regarding XML serialization:
> >
> >Given the metadata that is defined, wouldn't the XML representation of a
> >Core Component, BIE, etc. amount to an XML fragment - i.e. a single tag
> >such as <LocationName> or a set of tags such as <ResidenceAddress> and
> >its contained elements?  I'm thinking that all of the metadata for the
> >entity (as a whole) would be defined in the registry, not within the XML
> >representation itself.  Please let me know if I'm missing something on
> >this.  The caveat would be that it may not be well-formed XML.
> >
> >- Joe
> >
> >
> >David RR Webber - XML ebusiness wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Message text written by Matthew MacKenzie
> >>
> >>
> >>I don't advocate people calling any home cooked XML or CSV a core
> >>component in their XML registry...I think that will just muddy the waters.
> >>
> >><<<
> >>
> >>Matt,
> >>
> >>FYI - there are a dozen registries out there already with their
> >>own XML formats for content.
> >>
> >>Having the ATG specify XML for an OASIS Registry IMHO
> >>is a fraught path.
> >>
> >>My suggestion is a sub-team of Registry - and we have a
> >>collaborative effort between the concerned parties:
> >>
> >>My list would include UBL, CAM, UDDI, CCTS, ATG, and
> >>then other OASIS TC's that want to liaise, along with
> >>invite to OAGI and DISA X12 to have an observer each.
> >>
> >>DW.
> >>
> >>

Attachment: Chiusano_Joseph.vcf
Description: Card for Joseph Chiusano