[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Repurposing version attributes E: [ebxml-cppa] CPP and CPAelementdocumentation changes
implying the version by means of the schema namespace isn't very useful or practical IMO. you can't easily parse the namespace name and derive a version identifier. IMO, the namespace name should be opaque (since URIs are supposed to be opaque) and there should be a separate means by which one can infer the version of whatever it is that defines the semantics that pertain to the elements and attributes defined by a given namespace. That semantic intent cannot always be conveyed simply by virtue of the XML Schema definition (.xsd) otherwise we wouldn't be spending all of this time on the prose of the spec:) Cheers, Chris Arvola Chan wrote: > It seems more useful to identify the version of the schema than the version > of the spec. > > In a CPP/A instance, there already is a > > xmlns:tp="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-cppa/schema/cpp-cpa-2_0 > .xsd" > > declaration. I think the above namespace URI implies the version of the > spec, but the version of the schema is not indicated anywhere. > > -Arvola > > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:58 AM > To: Christopher Ferris > Cc: Dale Moberg; Cppa (E-mail) > Subject: Re: Repurposing version attributes E: [ebxml-cppa] CPP and CPA > elementdocumentation changes > > > > I believe that when this was last discussed, we were assuming that the > version of the spec and the version of the schema are the same. If we > start making maintenance changes in the schema between versions of the > spec, this must somehow be indicated in the instance documents so the two > parties know they are working with the same schema. > > Regards, > Marty > > **************************************************************************** > ********* > > Martin W. Sachs > IBM T. J. Watson Research Center > P. O. B. 704 > Yorktown Hts, NY 10598 > 914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287 > Notes address: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM > Internet address: mwsachs @ us.ibm.com > **************************************************************************** > ********* > > > > Christopher > Ferris To: Dale Moberg > <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com> > <chris.ferris@sun cc: Martin W > Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, "Cppa (E-mail)" <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org> > .com> Subject: Re: Repurposing > version attributes E: [ebxml-cppa] CPP and CPA element > documentation changes > 03/25/2002 11:47 > AM > > > > > > yes, sorry, i meant spec version. > > Dale Moberg wrote: > > >>I am not certain that Chris's intent was to indicate >>schema version or instead specification version. >> >>My reading of XSLT (which he mentioned as a model) >>suggests that the version indicates the >>specification version (which may remain the same >>even while a new schema might be announced containing >>technical corrections). This makes conventions >>about namespace URI, shemaLocation, and >>so forth independent of what the CPP/A processing >>software looks to decide whether/how to interpret >>schema elements. >> >>Maybe Chris can clarify this for us? >> >>Dale Moberg >> >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com] >>Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 8:50 PM >>To: Dale Moberg >>Cc: Cppa (E-mail) >>Subject: Re: [ebxml-cppa] CPP and CPA element documentation changes >> >> >> >>Now that Chris mentioned it, I agree that the original ebXML team did >>discuss using the CPP and CPA version attributes to indicate the version >>of >>the schema that applies to the instance document. However, that never >>got >>into ver. 1.0. Ver. 1.0 talks about using the version attribute to >>version >>the instance document. >> >>I suggest that we redefine the version attribute to identify the version >>of >>the schema (which is presumably the same as the version of the >>specification) and handle versioning of the instance documents through a >>guid. >> >>I assume that the schema document identifies its own version. >> >>Regards, >>Marty >> >>************************************************************************ >>************* >> >>Martin W. Sachs >>IBM T. J. Watson Research Center >>P. O. B. 704 >>Yorktown Hts, NY 10598 >>914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287 >>Notes address: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM >>Internet address: mwsachs @ us.ibm.com >>************************************************************************ >>************* >> >> >> >> >> Dale Moberg >> >> <dmoberg@cycloneco To: "Cppa >>(E-mail)" <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org> >> mmerce.com> cc: >> >> Subject: [ebxml-cppa] >>CPP and CPA element documentation changes >> 03/23/2002 12:51 >> >> PM >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Attached are some options for changes to >>CPP and CPA reflecting recent discussions. >> >>Marty Sachs and others have proposed dropping >>the version element. >> >>Chris Ferris reminded us of a use of version as >>indicating the version of the CPPA specification >>that the documents were governed by (this version >>is distinct from any versioning of a schema, as >>is done with XSLT.) >> >>Here is how to assemble the variants. >> >>The "CPP CPA element core language.doc" is the baseline, >>with the version attributes omitted. >> >>To get the full Ferris option, add in the text from >>"CPA version of specification.doc" and "CPP version of >>specification.doc" to the core. >> >>To get a variant in which a version attribute is retained >>for CPA, and that has a role in Negotiation, add in >>"CPA version for negotiation.doc" to the core. >> >>I did not supply a variant for versioning the CPP because >>I have not been able to think of a simple way to explain how >>CPP versioning would work. Unlike the CPA, where apparently >>users might wish to maintain their cpaid in a new agreement, >>CPP versioning does not have a use case currently. >> >>Please comment on these on the list, >>indicating rankings for the variants, or new ones >>if you want to add your own language. >>We will seek to obtain a consensus on this >>Monday. >> >>Thanks, Dale Moberg >> >> >> >> >> >> >>#### CPP CPA element core language.doc has been removed from this note >>on >>March 24 2002 by Martin W Sachs >>#### CPA version for negotiation.doc has been removed from this note on >>March 24 2002 by Martin W Sachs >>#### CPA version of specification.doc has been removed from this note on >>March 24 2002 by Martin W Sachs >>#### CPP version of specification.doc has been removed from this note on >>March 24 2002 by Martin W Sachs >> >> >> >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> >> > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC