Do we only care about EXPRESS?

At an implementation level, we have two types audiences for the DEXs / capabilities.

1) People who are STEP aware & understand EXPRESS / EXPRESS-G

2) The mainstream software industry who primarily uses UML/XML – not EXPRESS

The DEXs & capabilities (in particular) are all documented as EXPRESS-G models.

This is because it is documenting a STEP standard. Hence the target audience is 1)

So here’s a thought – why don’t we modify the DTD of the capabilities so that an information model can be presented as either an EXPRESS model OR a UML model?

In particular, the pseudo EXPRESS-G diagrams that we draw could have two representations:

1) UML

2) EXPRESS.

Similarly for the instance diagrams

Where we have included Part21, we should always include Part 28.

The XSL could then present the capability as UML or EXPRESS depending on the audience.

The important thing is that UML is just another view on the same information.

What do people think?

Note – the immediate impact is that we have to modify the DTD & XSL slightly

The drawing & presentation of the UML diagrams etc can wait.

So if we go down this route, we are laying the foundation for having multiple views on the capabilities. We do not have to do all the work straight away!

Regards
Rob

-------------------------------------------
Rob Bodington
Eurostep Limited
Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com
Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com
Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030
Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401

plcs message