[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emergency-msg] DOM?
Renato,
See my comments below.
Patti From: Renato Iannella [mailto:renato@nicta.com.au] Sent: Mon 8/21/2006 10:57 PM To: Emergency_Mgt_Msg_SC Subject: [emergency-msg] DOM? 1 - since the cardinality is defined per message type, there should not be
any mandatory/conditional fields
on the generic model
[Patti - Some elements are manditory or conditional for all message types.
I think that needs to be reflected in the "DOM". As a system architect, I would
like to include "DOM"s for each of the message types that show what is manditory
and conditional for that message type.]
2 - DOM is not the correct term to use, as a DOM is an "API to parsing
structured information"
Can we just call it the "Resource Messaging Model" ?
[Patti - I haven't understood the use of "DOM" either, but it may be an
OASIS thing that we can't get away from. What about "Resource Messaging Data
Model"?]
3 - We had previous discussion on the 'hybrid-model" - there is not that
much difference now, only the schedule info
are all group together and the response has explicit
accept/decline/reason elements.
[Patti - I personally think the "DOM" should be changed to match the
"hybrid-model" in most respects, but I think we need to dicuss it as a
SC.]
Comments?
Cheers... Renato Iannella
National ICT Australia (NICTA)
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]