[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Use of genericode
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Linda van den Brink <linda@dynasol.nl> Date: Jan 10, 2008 9:14 AM Subject: Use of genericode To: clr-dev@lists.oasis-open.org Hi all, For a Dutch customer I'm working on several information models. These information models are developed in cooperation with a Dutch organization that manages geo-standards in the public sector. The customer, and the geo-standards organization, are looking for a good way to manage codelists. I've recommended that they look at genericode, and in turn they are now asking me to look at this. First of all, is Genericode stable enough to be considered for production use? And what about the context/value association spec? I noticed that it was heavily trimmed down compared to the previous version, which was a description of not only the CVA format but also a methodology for validation that relied on Schematron. I am curious about the reasons for removing this dependency on Schematron. Or is the validation methodology going to be in a separate spec? I've been experimenting a bit with the Schematron implementation of the CVA validation available at Cranesoftwrights. Is it an implementation of the latest version of the spec? Finally, a different sort of question. The geo-standards group I'm involved in has been using UML to express all their information models. They generate their schemata from UML. I expect them to ask me if Genericode code lists could also be expressed in UML, but I don't see an obvious way of doing this. Any thoughts on this? Linda
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]