Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Rule: 96 Two Schema

[Dan Vint <dvint@acord.org>]

I'm fine with the requirement to send both, but I think it should still be 
a stated requirement/rule.

..dan

At 08:22 PM 7/15/2003 +0100, Anthony B. Coates wrote:
>** Reply to message from Dan Vint <dvint@acord.org> on Tue, 15 Jul 2003
>09:33:16 -0700
>
>I am *completely* opposed to the suggestion that users can filter annotations
>out of their Schemas if required.  My experience is that only the < 1% of
>people who take part in XML committees have the confidence and experience for
>that.  Worse, it just introduces an unnecessary, globally-distributed quality
>control issue.  If it is so easy to filter out the documentation, then let us
>do it just once ourselves for everyone on the planet, and issue two equivalent
>normative Schemas, full-fat and low-fat.  I'm happy to contribute an XSLT
>script or Java class to do the job, if it is too hard to do from the Schema
>generation tools.
>
>         Cheers,
>                 Tony.
>
> > At 10:27 AM 7/15/2003 -0500, Burcham, Bill wrote:
> > >I think we should remove this rule.  A user can filter out annotations if
> > >they are unwanted.
> >
> >
> > Ok then the implication of this is that the only schema that UBL sends is
> > one with full documentation/annotation. I suppose I can live with that, 
> but
> > again I would state this as a rule that the schemas are fully documented.
> >
> > ..dan
> >
> >
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Chin Chee-Kai [mailto:cheekai@softml.net]
> > >Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 9:52 AM
> > >To: UBL-NDR
> > >Subject: Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Rule: 96 Two Schema
> > >
> > >
> > >Objection : Stating two versions of schemas that are
> > >             otherwise the same except for documentation
> > >             is a user-level optimisation/preference issue
> > >             that shouldn't become a hard-rule from UBL/NDR.
> > >
> > >This is not to say that we cannot publish as a non-normative add-on, or
> > >reading aid or optimized version (assuming
> > >documented version is normative).
> > >
> > >Suggest removing it.
> > >
> > >
> > >Best Regards,
> > >Chin Chee-Kai
>====
>Anthony B. Coates
>London Market Systems Limited
>33 Throgmorton Street, London, EC2N 2BR
>http://www.londonmarketsystems.com/
>mailto:abcoates@londonmarketsystems.com
>Mobile/Cell: +44 (79) 0543 9026
>[MDDL Editor (Market Data Definition Language), http://www.mddl.org/]
>[FpML Arch WG Member (Financial Products Markup Language), 
>http://www.fpml.org/]
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>This Email may contain confidential information and/or copyright material 
>and is intended for the use of the addressee only.
>Any unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you receive this Email by mistake 
>please advise the sender immediately by using the reply  facility in your 
>e-mail software.
>Email is not a secure method of communication and London Market Systems 
>Limited cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of 
>this message or any attachment(s). Please examine this email for virus 
>infection, for which London Market Systems Limited accepts no 
>responsibility. If verification of this email is sought then please 
>request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated any views or opinions 
>presented are solely those of the author and do not represent those of 
>London Market Systems Limited.
>
>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting 
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl-ndrsc/members/leave_workgroup.php