OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

codelist message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [codelist] code list validation

Please note that the principal requirement for the PLCS TC is for structured sets of reference data with hierarchies to be referenced in a way similar to that noted by Ken.

However, we require to reference such hierarchies from a range of different representations of an ISO 10303 information model, including simple text files, XML and XML schema.

We are therefore using OWL to generate the necessary structures.

The simple list, if I may call it such, is a subset of this requirement.

Howard Mason
PLCS TC Co-Chair
-----Original Message-----
From: G. Ken Holman [mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com]
Sent: 07 September 2006 23:30
To: 'Code List Representation TC'
Subject: Re: [codelist] code list validation

               *** WARNING ***

This mail has originated outside your organization, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.

     Keep this in mind if you answer this message.

Thanks for this, Ray!

At 2006-09-07 16:30 -0400, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:
>One of our interests at the Library of Congress  is to be able to point
>to an external codelist, rather than include it within an XML schema.
>(I'm not talking about validating, which I accept is out-of-scope.)

So, perhaps, this would be for guiding data entry

using a tool that only supported W3C Schema?

>In other words, instead of saying:
><xsd:restriction base="xsd:string">
><xsd:enumeration value="1"/>
><xsd:enumeration value="2"/>
><xsd:enumeration value="3"/>
><xsd:enumeration value="4"/>
><xsd:enumeration value="5"/>
><xsd:enumeration value="6"/>
><xsd:enumeration value="7"/>
>You could say:
><xsd:restriction base="xsd:string" codelist="http://....."/>
>There is no such syntax yet (that I'm aware of), most likely because
>there is no standard codelist format yet. But it might be as simple as
>above -- defining a 'codelist' attribute on the restriction element
>within the schema language. Of course it would need to be accepted into
>the language by the W3C.

The XML nature of any code list representation

would allow you to transform your "master"

genericode expression into the existing W3C Schema expression.

>(I know there are suggested approaches using 'import' and 'include' but
>these are too sloppy.

An interesting adjective to use ... though I

agree these constructs in W3C Schema are somewhat

limited.  The RELAX-NG equivalents appear to me

to have more power.  To me rather than being

"sloppy" they are too rigid in W3C

Schema.  Import and include provide very useful

modularization facilities in standards like W3C Schema, RELAX-NG, XSLT, etc.

>We currently use comments or annotations to point to external lists.
>But when we have a standard format for a codelist, and if there is
>syntax to point to it, people will begin to develop validation
>I think this would have significant utility, and it seems so simple.

Yes, though it does seem repetitive in that it

duplicates existing functionality (however

limited the enumeration of a set of values is that is already there).

>it be reasonable for this TC to formulate a recommendation along these
>lines, and forward it to the W3C?

There are procedures to do so, but in my

standards experience I have not seen the

introduction of something new that supplants

something that exists.  What features of

genericode do you think would overwhelmingly

convince the W3C Schema committee that a new

requirement is being met that is not being met by

the existing standard?  It would be on such a

basis that this would even be considered by them.

What I believe you *have* identified is a

specific committee deliverable which could be,

say, an XSLT stylesheet that converts an instance

of genericode into an instance of W3C Schema

enumerations suitable for incorporation into an existing W3C Schema expression.

Then users of genericode would be in a position,

when setting up, say, an authoring environment,

to run a workflow process each time a genericode

file is updated to simultaneously synthesize a

parallel W3C Schema expression of the enumeration

suitable for all tasks based on that

technology.  Same for RELAX-NG.  One could even

produce an external parameter entity for use with

DTD-expressed constraints.  I can picture that

our deliverable could include each of these as

supplemental tools tuned to the particular delivery of genericode.

I look forward to any other opinions by group members.

Thanks again, Ray!

. . . . . . . . . . .  Ken

UBL/XML/XSLT/XSL-FO training: Vårø, Denmark 2006-10-02/06,11-20/24 UBL International 2006  2006-11-13/17 http://www.ublconference.com 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

This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]