RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Documenting our choice of XSD

[Mavis Cournane <mavis.cournane@csw.co.uk>]

I don't see why 5.1 #2 cannot serve this purpose. I don't see any
qualitative difference and it is a General Rule type of statement. Also by
putting it there it becomes a statement of fact with no expectation for a
rationale.

Mavis
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CSW Informatics Ltd
4240 Nash Court
Oxford Business Park South
Oxford
OX4 2RU
Tel: +44/0 1865 337400  Fax: +44/0 1865 337433
Web: http://www.cswinformatics.com

"CSW Informatics delivers high quality consultancy and
training services, to assist our customers in meeting their
requirements for innovative information management
solutions using the most appropriate technologies,
products and software systems"

---------------------------------------------
Legal Disclaimer: http://www.csw.co.uk/disclaimer.htm
--------------------------------------------


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:eve.maler@sun.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:29 PM
> To: ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Documenting our choice of XSD
>
>
> I took an action item last week to write up a little section for the NDR
> document that says we decided that the UBL source format would be
> XSD.  When it came right down to it, it turned out to be a really tiny
> section!  I suggest that we use simple wording that doesn't provide a
> rationale (since it's largely not for technical reasons).  Does this seem
> all right to everyone?
>
>    "The normative schema documents that implement the UBL
> business document
> types shall conform to XML Schema Part 1: Structures and XML
> Schema Part 2:
> Datatypes."
>
> Mark can put this wording wherever seems appropriate to him.
> There are at
> least two candidate locations.  My first thought was the introduction to
> Section 4 (Design Considerations), whose subsections discuss
> various thorny
> issues having to do with schema design (and, in some cases, specifically
> XSD design).  However, this is an informative section; would that be
> appropriate?  Another choice is in Section 5.1, General Rules (if it
> survives my invasive comments on that section :-); in fact, the text in
> rule #2 there already *almost* serves the purpose.
>
>          Eve
> --
> Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
> Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>