[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: NDR 2 Comment / RE: Customising and versioning
Background: I feel strongly that the business users of UBL would benefit by making the subsetting of UBL without a change of the namespace the prefered customisation technique, where possible. For this there are the following techniques as far as I'm aware which seem to be usable with UBL 2: To describe a subset without the need for a namespace change: 1. CAM files 2. XPath files 3. W3C XML Schema redefine 4. W3C XML Schema rewriting of entire set of schema files All these can contain IDs which can be referenced from an ebBP definition as part of the description of the document(s) used for the process (ebBP 2.0.3). Each technique has a different set of benefits related to different use case requirements and so each has strengths and weaknesses depending on the target scenario. Related to UBL 2 NDR There might be an impact of the yet-to-be-chosen mechanism for UBL TC creation of minor versions of UBL 2 on the above methods of subsetting and other customisations (such as extension). The use of redefine to create minor versions might limit the number of further uses of redefine (W3C XML Schema 'xsd:redefine') due to the extra stress palced on XML tools such as parsers and validators on following the complexities of multiple redefinitions. Personally I found that the following works with the tools I use: 1. use redefine to create a minor version by derivation from a previous major version of UBL 2 schema files 2. use redefine again to designate the extent of a subset 3. use substitution groups to extend the subset schema set but there were the beginnings of possible cracks appearing in the validation once the extension was added. Although this was anecdotal evidence in that there could have been any number of reasons for the slight flakiness in validation at the end, the complexity might be a factor in limiting the actual extensibility of such subsetted minor versions if redefine is used for the minor versioning. I don't see this as a sufficient reason to not use redefine for minor versioning but I would like to see the decision made about this and this added, perhaps in an appendix to the UBL 2 NDR or to the main NDR standard before it is standardised because it will be a factor in planning implementations of UBL with regard to techniques to be used in subsetting and other customisations. Many thanks Stephen Green
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]