[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: CAP v1.2 schema(s) issue
All, The CAP Public Review Draft 02 dated 29 September 2009 [0] contains
a schema in section 3.4. Call this the "schema in the
document." The document claims that Section 3 is normative, and
there is no exception noted for the schema. OASIS also provides that schema separately in [1] and [2].
Call each these identical schemata the "free-standing schema." Unfortunately, the schema in the document is different from the
free-standing schema. In addition to a host of insignificant whitespace changes: (a) the types of the <altitude> and <ceiling> elements
are different (xs:string in the free-standing schema vs. xs:decimalstring in
the schema in the document; note that decimalstring is not part of the XML
standard schema definition); and (b) the <mimeType> element is optional in the schema in the
document and required in the free-standing schema So which schema is correct and/or normative, and
will OASIS fix this problem when CAP v1.2 moves from Public Review Draft status
to Standard status? We would like to use the free-standing schema (draft), but is this
correct? [0] http://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/cap/v1.2/CAP-v1.2.html [1] http://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/cap/v1.2/CAP-v1.2.xsd [2] http://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/cap/v1.2/pr02/CAP-v1.2-PR02.xsd Thanks, Timothy
D. Gilmore | SAIC Senior Test Engineer | ILPSG | NIMS SC |
NIMS STEP phone: 606.274.2063 | fax: 606.274.2012 mobile: 606.219.7882 |
email: P Please consider the
environment before printing this email. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]