RE: [ubl] Proposed withdrawal of my NDR suggestions for ABIE extensibility

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

At 2006-06-23 05:21 +0000, juerg.tschumperlin@minedu.govt.nz wrote:
>Thank you Ken,
>
>Your reply helps me to better understand the intentions and background.

I appreciate the discussion, Juerg, because it 
helps the committee understand the questions out 
there that impact on the decisions we have to make.

>Copying the models and 'pushing the button' is 
>fine, particularly if there are programmatic 
>checks in place to ensure minor version backward compatibility.

:{)}  I've suggested in my paper that my concept 
of the XML-encoded XPath files are suitable to 
the task ... I plan to prove or disprove that 
when I get the chance, but right now I'm writing 
my UBL training material and cannot make the time.

>I also start to understand that (please correct me if I'm wrong)

(please continue to ask!)

>- all schemata in a release package will be of 
>the same (minor) version. So far, I probably 
>incorrectly assumed that a message schema 2.2 
>can import library modules 2.1 if these don't need changing at all.

Yes, I anticipate each minor release will have the same version on all modules.

>- each minor release package will contain all 
>message and library schemas (even if some of 
>them hadn't changed since the previous release)

Yes, I anticipate this to be true.

>Provided I understand it correctly, I can see 
>that this approach is appropriate for UBL releases.

I think the UBL methodology of using the models 
to derive the schema expressions supports this 
approach well.  I'm comparing this with customers 
who, not unexpectedly, use schema expressions as 
the centre of the modeling universe and I see 
syntactic barriers due to the modeling 
constraints specified in those schema languages.

But I think our approach does require finding the 
automated mechanisms for confirming changes are 
backwards compatible ... I'm looking forward to working on that.

>However, if one was to apply UBL NDR to a single 
>organisation with much more prescriptive message 
>schemas and faster change cycles, one would be 
>tempted (if not forced) to allow a 2.2 message 
>schema to import a 2.1 library schema if only 
>the message schema changed. But my topic is 
>probably going beyond the scope of UBL NDR.

Well, it will be interesting to find out.  There 
are committee member organizations marketing 
tools that may equip customers to make rapid changes within bounds.

But for those hand-rolling their changes I'm 
hoping the processes put in place will suitably 
reassure one their changes are backwards compatible.

Thanks again, Juerg!

. . . . . . . . . Ken

--
Registration open for UBL training:    Montréal, Canada 2006-08-07
Also for XSL-FO/XSLT training:    Minneapolis, MN 2006-07-31/08-04
Also for UBL/XML/XSLT/XSL-FO training: Varo,Denmark 06-09-25/10-06
World-wide corporate, govt. & user group UBL, XSL, & XML training.
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal