RE: Use of Codelist in CIQ - A thought

["Colin Wallis" <colin_wallis@hotmail.com>]

Fine by me on the 2 schemas
Cheers
Colin



>From: "Ram Kumar" <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>
>To: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org
>CC: "Max Voskob" <max.voskob@paradise.net.nz>, "Bruehlmeier, David" 
><david.bruehlmeier@sap.com>, "David Bruehlmeier" <typo3@bruehlmeier.com>, 
>"Colin Wallis" <colin_wallis@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Use of Codelist in CIQ - A thought
>Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:56:22 +1000
>
>Members,
>
>I sent you a list of questions earlier about the things we need to consider
>before using Codelist in CIQ. I have a thought. How about we use two
>versions
>of CIQ :
>- On using codelist and the other without codelist, but with the current
>approach
>for codelists.
>
>Though we will have two versions of the schemas, the XML documents 
>generated
>out of the two schemas will still be the same. Except that, one will do one
>pass
>validation and the other will do two pass validation.
>
>This gives the flexibility to the users to decide the best approach for
>them.
>
>Let me know your thoughts. The reason why I thought about this idea is
>because
>I am of the view that when users embedd CIQ specs., as part of their
>application or
>other specs., and if they do not use codelist approach to handle their
>codes, they
>will be forced to jsut validate CIQ related data using codelist methodology
>which
>could be a pain for them.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ram

_________________________________________________________________
Live Search delivers results the way you like it. Try live.com now! 
http://www.live.com