OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: [office] Live meeting?


Sorry to send this to the whole group but Michael's out until the 13th.
Did we confirm a live meeting in Santa Clara on Feb 17 and 18? If so, do
we have any other details?

Again, sorry for the spam
Phil Boutros
VP, Technology

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Grosso [mailto:pgrosso@arbortext.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 4:26 PM
To: OASIS Open Office TC
Subject: RE: [office] Clarification re: DSDL and W3C Schema

I mostly disagree with John and Sean.

I am not a RELAX-NG expert, but from what I know and have heard,
RELAX-NG should be able to describe everything we 
would want to say.

And it should be feasible (there are those with such
experience) to make clean, reasonable, automated 
conversions from RELAX-NG into the closest possible
analogues in XSD and DTDs.

I very much think we want (1) machine readable and
processable definitions of our language and (2) automatic 
conversions from our working language to the others.

I support the decision I thought we already took to use RELAX-NG as the
language with which we will define our application and to plan to
provide automatic translations to close-as-possible XSDs and DTDs.


At 21:10 2003 01 08 +0000, Sean McGrath wrote:
>I agree with John. There is a lot to be said for making the normative 
>expression of the constraints independent of schema-language du-jour. 
>Some BNF-ish notation along with narrative text is one possibilty. This

>will of course be imperfect, true expression of the specification can 
>only be seen through running code. However, I think this bears 
>consideration as putting one particular schema language "on top" to 
>generate the others mechanically risks:
>1) creating an impression that one particular schema language is 
>superior to the others (lets not start that debate!)
>2) mechanically generated schemas will always be yucky compared to hand

>crafted ones - creating second class citizens of the generated 
>Sean McGrath
>At 21:04 08/01/2003 +0000, John Chelsom wrote:
>>One reflection on the DTD/Relax/W3C Schema debate:
>>We seem to be assuming that we will need to perform an automated (and 
>>probably imperfect) transformation from a normative syntax into others

>>that people may want to use in their own implementations. We could, of

>>course, use any notation we like for the normative expression of the 
>>specification, so long as it unambiguously defines the XML structures 
>>in the open office format. We could then publish implementations as 
>>DTD/Relax/W3C Schema,etc with comments where necessary on how each 
>>syntax does (or does not) support what we have defined.
>>As far as I can see there is no necessity to define an automated 
>>transformation from our specification to any given format. Our problem

>>(almost) the same one that has been faced by activities such as UBL
and HL7
>>(for those of you interested in a far bigger manifestation of the
problem in
>>the healthcare domain). The problem is that XML schema languages (I
>>all of them, but I someone may want to correct me) are not rich enough
>>specify the logical information models required in those
>>The only thing that we definitely need to do is make sure our 
>>specification is complete and unambiguous in itself. We can then add 
>>examples of syntax-specific implementations to help people implement 
>>their own applications, but these aren't normative and (almost 
>>certainly) won't be generated 100% automtically from the specification

>>CSW Group Ltd
>>4240 Nash Court
>>Oxford Business Park South
>>OX4 2RU
>>Tel: +44/0 1865 337400  Fax: +44/0 1865 337433
>>Web: http://www.csw.co.uk
>>Delivering value to our customers by deploying innovative, web-based, 
>>products and solutions for the integration of processes, data and 
>>CSW's XML Summer School 27th - 31st July 2003
>>Wadham College, Oxford
>>Further information: http://www.xmlsummerschool.com
>>Legal Disclaimer: http://www.csw.co.uk/disclaimer.htm

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC