[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: FW: (GJXDM) Re: Request for GJXDM technical assistance
FYI -----Original Message----- From: gjxdm@ojp.gov [mailto:gjxdm@ojp.gov] Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 3:12 AM To: gjxdm@ojp.gov Subject: (GJXDM) Re: Request for GJXDM technical assistance From: Mark T. Whitworth First I'd like to say that I'd be very interested in how things are progressing with the OXCI. Do you know of anyone participating from Pennsylvania? I am currently looking to finish off the development of a Court Filing interface for the PA District Justice System, but we are too far in to take this specification into consideration. The good news is that it is based on the GJXDM pre-release 3.0.0.0 schema, and includes an ebXML envelope similar to the one described in your documentation. With regard to your questions: 1. I've written my own java object generator therefore I don't have the issue you've run into. I do know that XML Spy will allow you to construct schemas that include invalid restrictions. You might try ensuring that the xerces parser will successfully validate the source schema, before running it through the code generator. 2. Once again, I've written my own schema extraction tool to pull elements and there entire hierarchy out of the GJXDM (or any other schema) into there own schema as the base for a sub-set. The equivalent of this is a bit of copy and paste from the GJXDM. From there I've added whatever additional constraints were required manually. Adjusting minOccurs / maxOccurs and eliminating unneeded elements. I'll email you the three schemas (document, extension, sub-set) that make up our current Court Filing. 3. In coordination with the PA JNET group, I've put together some recommendations on one way of addressing this. They should be posted to the Listserv sometime this week. I believe that it also covers many of the concerns outlined in Gary Poindexter's response to this topic as well. It boils down to a more basic core GJXDM, and adding flexibility to the sub-setting process. From my perspective the GJXDM sub-setting approach is the way to go, if they can address 3 or 4 core issues. Especially if your going to be defining another specification that is reliant on the GJXDM. Mark T. Whitworth Senior Software Consultant Ajilon Consuling 717-795-2000 ext:3155 Mark.Whitworth@pacourts.us
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]