[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] What is interoperability anyway / really?
2008/6/8 David RR Webber (XML) <firstname.lastname@example.org>: > Dave, > > Guess we need to broach this topic some too. > > For me interoperability is about people being able to predictably exchange > documents - and publish clear instructions on rules / handling / content > models including contextual templates and patterns that are intended / > expected. End user expectations? So again we need to care about how far back into implementation we go. How might content models impact user interaction and expectations David? > > Sadly we have a chunk of folks out there that believe publishing an XSD and > then enforcing validation there of is how you achieve interoperability. <grin/> I'd prefer Robs C++ as an example! XSD is quite possibly the worst example of interop expectations! > > They are angry and confused when things pass their XSD and proceed to trash > their backend applications - or frustrated when people construct what appear > to be reasonable content from human perspective - but the XSD rejects as > invalid for some arcane reason. Then of course the final straw is wierd > content created automatically by tooling software that passes the XSD but is > a nightmare to process and contains 3x the amount of markup that sane people > would ever want in there! Good examples of bad interoperability! And why it's necessary. > > The problem put simply is that XSD is non-deterministic - and was never > meant to be deterministic. [[And it should be put down]] > > So in our case - scripting tools like CAM add context - and ability to > assert deterministic rules that make predictable outcomes possible. A > "filter" in effect - that can tell you if the content will be acceptable and > make sense. Being totally ignorant of CAM, can you provide an example of how such a tool would help us here please. How it might help an end user have confidence that Vendor A product produces the same result as Vendor B? Even if it's not visual, an example would help us understand. > > But CAM is designed for business transaction exchanges - not documents. > > However the principles are the same - just that the set of "smart" functions > need to be adapted to document application needs - such as page counts and > section content / page headers / footers, signatures, et al - which are not > part of the lexicon of CAM. Understood, which is why I'm asking how your experience might be brought to bear for this use case. > > So - overall seems to me for interoperability - you need the same ability as > CAM brings to produce open standard sharable rule sets and patterns that can > be verified, documented and will check instances conform to them - but with > a document lexicon of functions.... Interop really is hard to pin down with easy clear words. As for testing the test kit, meta testing! This isn't easy! regards -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk