Re: Agenda item: XSD and DTD for CPP/CPA

[Arvola Chan <arvola@tibco.com>]

Appendix C in the 1.0 version of the CPPA spec has the following title:

 

  DTD Corresponding to Complete CPP/CPA Definition (Normative)

 

If this appendix is to be retained, it should be indicated as being non-normative if it is not able to capture all the constraints expressed in the corresonding XSD.

 

Regards,

-Arvola

 

----- Original Message -----

From: "christopher ferris" <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>

To: "James Bryce Clark" <jamie.clark@mmiec.com>

Cc: <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Tony Weida" <TonyW@EDIFECS.COM>

Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 6:26 PM

Subject: Re: Agenda item: XSD and DTD for CPP/CPA

> The DTD was non-normative anyway since it cannot represent 
the
> full expression of the XML Schema. The xsd will need to be 
updated,
> but I concur with the sentiment that the DTD not be dropped 
just
> yet.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Chris
> 
> James Bryce Clark wrote:
> > 
> > At 09:22 AM 
7/20/01, Tony Weida wrote:
> > >Since XML Schema is now a formal W3C 
Recommendation, I propose that we
> > >consider dropping the DTD 
from the next major version of our spec.
> > >
> > 
>Tony
> > 
> > Just a preliminary reaction -- Isn't there a 
substantial non-behemoth user,
> > and would-be-adopter, base with a 
substantial legacy dependency DTDs?  You
> > might not want to 
bail on those people right away.    In spite of the
> > 
superiority and inevitability of schema, I'm not sure the upgrade path
> 
> looks easy to them.
> > 
> > Jamie
> > 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> 
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-cppa-request@lists.oasis-open.org
>