[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: SV: [ubl] Suggestions for an UBL ExtensibleContent area
>In my role as Secretariat Manager for SC34 I've helped the authors >marshal the evolution of the above into the standardized >Namespace-based Validation Dispatching Language (NVDL) ISO/IEC >19757-4 - part 4 of Document Schema Definition Languages (DSDL): > http://www.jtc1sc34.org/repository/0694c.htm excellent news! I had no idea it was up to a draft yet, I thought it was only under discussion. >I have shared with others that I think NVDL would be the best basis >for the customization of UBL using namespaces so have pointed them in >this direction. I'm not averse to this idea, but I think it would be problematic for others here. >My gut feel is that using NVDL we would probably not need an explicit >area for extensible content as the entire instance would be >extensible yes, but then we would need to define how we were going to deal with extensibility if NVDL were our extensibility mechanism. I suppose that would then require that everyone sent the document through NVDL processor first. > Explicitly creating >such a section might lead to the impression that extensions could >only be added in that section. I think though that if one had an area set aside for extensions, via use of xsd:any, that one could use NVDL is one wanted to handle these things, or other methods. >>), and application usage (transformation). This is more the kind of >>thing that should be moved to HISC if ExtensibleContent was accepted. >I'm not confident that validation issues belong in HISC. The code >list value validation work I'm doing is in a task group of UBL, not of HISC. Probably right, I was thinking in the context of HISC because the examples I was working on were getting very into various possible implementation strategies.