[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emergency] Statement of Use
> -----Original Message----- > From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info] > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:52 > To: Elysa Jones > Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [emergency] Statement of Use > > Elysa, > > OASIS changed the rules here from previously - when ANY > statement of use was acceptable. > > Now they want some level of conformance clauses in the > specification itself. > > " > A specification that is approved by the TC at the Public > Review Draft, Committee Specification or OASIS Standard level > must include a separate section, listing a set of numbered > conformance clauses, to which any implementation of the > specification must adhere in order to claim conformance to > the specification (or any optional portion thereof).* > <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#transition_2_18> > " > > They have some samples of such conformance clauses they have in mind. > > I'm inclined to agree with Rex - that creating actual XML > instances for your own use purposes - coupled with validation > and documentation that forinstance a CAM template can then > enforce against those samples - should cover off a use > statement - in that this shows that the specification > actually works for a real scenario. We have a conformance section in this standard. It says, more or less, that a conforming "HAVE report" is an XML document that validates against the HAVE schema and meets the additional requirements in the standard, and a conforming "HAVE report producer" is a software entity that produces a conforming report when it is expected to do so. (It doesn't matter how such an expectation is set and how the report is produced and made available.) So I think that a statement of use from an organization should say, essentially, that that organization has been able to implement a conforming producer. The actual form of the producer doesn't matter. Alessandro > > I believe that is the most important thing these statements > provide - is that people know the specification has actually > been tried in practice - rather than just being entirely theoretical. > > Thanks, DW > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]