[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [ubl] Minutes for UBL Naming and Design Rules meeting 7 November 2001
I will be forwarding the weekly minutes of the Naming and Design Rules SC to the whole TC to avoid the potential of "isolation" that I described last week. Items to note below: - We will be compiling an issue outline from many excellent sources. - Leading up to December 10, we will give top priority to issues of customization and vendor support. - We have identified W3C XML Schema validators that we will test against. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thanks! Eve >Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:06:39 -0500 >From: "Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com> >Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for UBL Naming and Design Rules meeting 7 >November 2001 >To: ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org >List-Archive: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc> > >Please review these minutes and bring up any problems on the list before >our next meeting on 14 November. BTW, I will be forwarding our minutes to >the whole ubl list so that they stay in touch with what we're doing. > >1. Roll call (quorum is 8) > > Bill Burcham YES > Doug Bunting YES > Dave Carlson YES > Matt Gertner YES > Mark Crawford YES > Jack Gager > Arofan Gregory YES (joined at x:18) > Eduardo Gutentag > Eve Maler YES > Dale McKay YES > Sue Probert > Marion Royal > Kelly Schwarzhoff > Gunther Stuhec YES > Mike Rawlins > > Quorum reached by x:12 > >2. Acceptance of minutes of 30 October - 1 November 2001 meeting: > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200111/msg00000.html > > Accepted. > >3. Adoption of today's agenda > > We agreed to drop the "discuss issues" agenda item formally, though we > may discuss it briefly in a "meta" fashion. > >4. Review and develop our issue outline in light of the analysis inputs; > I think we're going to want to number our issues for easy reference > > We agreed that it's a good approach to use all of our analysis inputs > to form a master outline (and Mark has the perfect history to do this!). > We also agreed to populate the outline, where possible, with answers > that other groups have come up with. > > When Mark presents us with a draft populated outline, we will review > it at that point. > > We discussed how position papers should be marked up. Vanilla Word, > plain text, and vanilla HTML are okay, with Word preferred by Mark. > Only .JPG and .GIF graphics should be produced. > > ACTION: Mark to deliver the draft by Monday COB. > > ACTION: Mark to send out a Word template for champions to use. > > ACTION: Eve to create NDR SC web page with analysis inputs linked by > Friday COB. > >5. Prioritize the issues that we need to resolve by December 10 > > Subsetting XSD is probably the thing that is most needed, so that > vendors can determine as soon as possible what they need to support. > In some cases, we may need a feature so badly that spotty vendor > support won't stop our recommending this, so this will clue them in > to work on supporting it. In other cases, if leading vendors support > a feature but others don't, and we decide it's worth the risk to > recommend it, smaller vendors will be on notice. > > Here are the XSD parsers we will pay attention to and the people who > will run test cases: > > Top tier (feature support matters to us): > > Xerces-J (leading in XSD support): Arofan/Kelly > Xerces-C++ (lagging a bit): Dave > XML Spy: Gunther > Tibco Extensibility (high price, instability, and lack of features > mean that we can live with lack of support of this one alone): > Dale > > Second tier (we'll check as we have time, and sometimes these are > the only ones that implement a certain feature): > > W3C XSV (not production quality, but usually most conforming): > Arofan or Dave > IBM Alphaworks XML Schema Checker (not production quality) > > We will put future versions of Apache Crimson and MSXML on a "tools > to watch" list. The champion of any one issue will be responsible > for creating or finding a test file. > > ACTION: Eve to pursue the question of the XSD conformance suite with > Kohsuke Kawaguchi. > > ACTION: Eve to determine whether there are plans to make Crimson > handle XSD. > > ACTION: Doug to look into whether we should add MSXML to our list. > > ACTION: Eve to locate the W3C/Microsoft validation effort and send > a link to the list. > > We also think that the customization strategy needs to be decided > as soon as possible, so that the Library Content and Context > Methodology SCs aren't blocked. > >6. Discuss issues (might need to change this list if our prioritizing > exercise gives us different results or if position papers aren't > available): > > - Modularization/namespaces/versioning > - Local vs. global elements > - Elements vs. attributes > > We deferred this item. > >7. Next steps > > Next week we will review the draft outline in detail, prioritize in > detail, and hopefully begin discussing the position papers we have in > hand. > >8. Adjourn > > Adjourned at y:05. >-- >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> -- Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center eve.maler @ sun.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC