RE: [codelist] Proposed Conformance Clause for genericode 1.0 specification

["Paul Spencer" <paul.spencer@boynings.co.uk>]

Ken,

My only concern is whether all the rules of genericode are expressed in the
schema. I have not been through the spec recently in sufficient detail to
check this.

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: G. Ken Holman [mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com]
> Sent: 21 July 2007 20:59
> To: Code List Representation TC
> Subject: [codelist] Proposed Conformance Clause for genericode 1.0
> specification
>
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm struggling with how much to put (or not to put) into a
> conformance clause for genericode.
>
> We certainly do not want to restrict *how* or *where* genericode is
> being used.  For example, I've posted in the UBL group a distillation
> of the International Data Dictionary spreadsheets as a number of
> genericode files.  This makes the information in these spreadsheets
> available as an XML resource for application developers to read and
> load up their application structures with language-based definitions
> suitable for pop-ups or help information.  The main post is here:
>
>    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200707/msg00027.html
>
> And there has been some discussion on UBL-Dev about things like
> column names:
>
>    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-dev/200707/msg00006.html
>
> I chose genericode because it can be used as a general-purpose
> keyed-table (used for data representation), unlike other table
> structures such as CALS tables (used for data presentation) that
> differ.  Interestingly, my current thoughts on this are to use
> <ComplexValue> elements and xml:lang= for content distinction.
>
> But it illustrates my point about conformance:  this data structure
> isn't being used as a (traditional?) code list, and I wouldn't want a
> conformance statement to prevent it from being used any way I need.
>
> I think we should rename the XSD file from CodeList.xsd to
> genericode.xsd and use the following simple statement of conformance
> as section 5 of the specification.  The current use of ID attributes
> in the document model ensures the uniqueness constraint of column
> identifiers and column references is checked, so I removed a sentence
> I originally had that indicated those aspects of uniqueness ... why
> mention it if it is already covered by the first sentence?
>
> Please let me know what you think about the text below.
>
> In particular, Mary, would such an abbreviated definition of
> conformance be acceptable to OASIS if it is acceptable to the
> CLRTC?  Second, do the OASIS naming guidelines compel us to
> incorporate a version number in the main XSD file such as
> genericode-1.0.xsd (I don't see any need for a version number in the
> utility xml.xsd fragment)?
>
> Thanks!
>
> . . . . . . . . . . Ken
>
> Conformance
>
>     An XML instance is considered to be conforming to the
>     OASIS code list representation genericode document model
>     if it does not violate any constraints expressed in the
>     genericode.xsd and xml.xsd schema expressions associated
>     with this version of the specification.
>
>
> --
> Upcoming public training: XSLT/XSL-FO Sep 10, UBL/code lists Oct 1
> World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training
> RSS feeds:     publicly-available developer resources and 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 Jul'07  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
> Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
>