It has been suggested that the quote at point 6
below:
"The PLCS consortium is planning on publishing the AP239 ARM
XML Schema through OASIS, so they don t expect implementations to be
EXPRESS-based."
is not an agreed OASIS PLCS TC position in respect of not
using EXPRESS-based implementations. Certainly, I believe that the
second half of the sentence is not a logical sequitur of the first. I
have made this second point to the receipients of the original
message.
As ever,
Tim.
*************************************************************************
*
* Dr. Timothy M. KING
CEng MIMechE PhD DIC ACGI
* Executive Consultant,
Enterprise Integration Technologies
* LSC Group,
Concept House, Victoria Road, TAMWORTH, UK - B79 7HL
* Switchboard: +44-1827-708000 Fax:
+44-1827-708500
* Direct telephone:
+44-1827-708535 (with VoiceMail)
* Mobile
telephone: +44-7813-131779
* e-mail:
tmk@lsc.co.uk Internet: http://www.lsc.co.uk/
*
*************************************************************************
At 04:39 PM 12/2/2003 +0000, David Price wrote:
>Hello WG3 and WG12,
>
>
>
>We ve been working with the AP233 and AP239 teams on Part 28
Edition 2 and
XML Schema. Part 28 E2 introduces a
configuration language allowing the
production of an
XML schema to be tailored for an EXPRESS schema. The
tailoring can happen at the global, entity and/or attribute level.
The
issue that has been raised during the
discussions with AP233 and AP239 is
if, or how, this
capability should be used.
>
>
>
>I m
trying to gather business requirements and technical requirements in
this area. If you have requirements or usage scenarios in
this area, I d
appreciate hearing about them.
>
>
>
>So far, what I ve heard from these
two teams (and relayed to the Part 28
team today) is
the following:
>
>
>
>1) A
single configuration to produce a default data exchange XML Schema
for both (or all?) APs is required. Some have said they
want WG3/SC4 to
agree and mandate a single
configuration for AP implementation.
>
>2) Exactly what the XML document looks like is not that
important as a
high level, model based API will be
used.
>
>3) The XML
schema elements should be recognizable as being derived from
the EXPRESS schema, but trying to reflect the EXPRESS
structure in XML is
less important than simplicity
and consistency.
>
>4)
Interoperability, and therefore the same configuration, is a high
priority for AP233, AP239 and PDM capabilities.
>
>5) The first AP233 and
AP239 implementations will be based on the ARM, not
the AIM. This may continue to be true for all implementations as
well.
>
>6) The PLCS
consortium is planning on publishing the AP239 ARM XML Schema
through OASIS, so they don t expect implementations to be
EXPRESS-based.
>
>
>
>Do
other AP teams share these requirements? I agree they are not all
completely consistent (ARM v. AIM), but requirements seldom
are. If your
requirements are different, in what
way?
>
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>David
>
>
>
>Phone +44 20 7704 0499
>
>Mobile +44 7788 561308
>
>8 Highbury Place, Flat
5
>
>London N5
1QZ
>
>
DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY
MARKED*** The information in this message is confidential and
may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee.
Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not
the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the
message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is
prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender
if you have received this message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC
Group. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office:
Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG