RE: [ubl-dev] SBS and Restricted Data Types

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

<Quote>
A note to all: it seems prudent to only work within the confines of what
is so readily determinable as to allow accurate state synchronisation
across transactions. This would be limited in each situation by software
capabilities on both sides of the transaction For standards efforts
and/or open trading scenarios a sensible common denominator (perhaps
lowest common denominator as aimed at with the SBS) has to be assumed.
This suggests use of Schematron and XSD schema as a means to guauge what
is feasible. 
</Quote>

Steve,

Your reference to "state synchronization" above threw me a bit because
it's fundamentally a process-oriented concept (thinking of WS-BPEL, W3C
WS-CDL, etc.). I want to make sure that I don't miss a point that you're
making - are you perhaps referring to what I would call a "common state
of validity", where what is considered valid/invalid by a sender is also
considered so by a receipient, for each and every "piece" of information
transmitted?

Joe

Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz Allen Hamilton
 
700 13th St. NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
O: 202-508-6514  
C: 202-251-0731
Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com

-----Original Message-----
From: stephen.green@systml.co.uk [mailto:stephen.green@systml.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 8:12 AM
To: ubl-dev@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ubl-dev] SBS and Restricted Data Types

Ken, sorry not to have read your posting before writing mine on the last
question.

One other thing though: How would you reckon the feasibility of
logically validating that a subset which includes pattern restrictions
of strings is a true strict subset of a schema?
Is it a step too far for now? If so I'd propose that adding pattern
restrictions might best be kept to specific agreements or individual
software implementations rather than including such in a standardisation
effort such as the SBS.

A note to all: it seems prudent to only work within the confines of what
is so readily determinable as to allow accurate state synchronisation
across transactions. This would be limited in each situation by software
capabilities on both sides of the transaction For standards efforts
and/or open trading scenarios a sensible common denominator (perhaps
lowest common denominator as aimed at with the SBS) has to be assumed.
This suggests use of Schematron and XSD schema as a means to guauge what
is feasible.

Thanks

Steve


---------------------------------------------------------------------
This publicly archived list supports open discussion on implementing the
UBL OASIS Standard. To minimize spam in the archives, you must subscribe
before posting.

[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Alternately, using email: list-[un]subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
List archives: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-dev/
Committee homepage: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ubl/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
Join OASIS: http://www.oasis-open.org/join/