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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep-cc-review message

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


Subject: Re: [regrep-cc-review] What Will RepositoryItem Be? (Was: Re: [regrep-cc-review]Kickoff!)


<Quote>
How about a hierarchy of ObjectType as follows:
</Quote>

I like it! Using a classification scheme (as you suggest) would allow it
to be extensible, as users may want to store (for example) "EDI Core
Components" as well (or whatever format may be used).

Joe

Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> 
> Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> 
> >Team,
> >
> >Another issue I'd like us to clarify is what a RepositoryItem for a
> >CC/BIE would be. Based on our most recent discussions, I think it is
> >reasonably clear - but I'd like to just make sure we're all on the same
> >page.
> >
> >The main question here is: "Is there any reason that we should not allow
> >for XML representations of Core Components to be stored?"
> >
> >David mentioned "XML fragments" in (a) below. This means that (for
> >example) a Core Component named "StreetName" could be stored as a single
> >element, as shown below (using type "string" for general purposes):
> >
> ><xsd:element name="StreetName" type="xsd:string"/>
> >
> >Of course, this would not be well-formed XML. The CCTS spec also
> >specifically states that Core Components are UML models.
> >
> >Having said that:
> >
> >We know that we need to comply with the CCTS spec by allowing Core
> >Components to be stored as UML models. This can already be done through
> >use of an ExtrinsicObject -
> >
> +1
> 
> > we would simply have to add an ObjectType or
> >MimeType that indicates a UML-format Core Component (althought I don't
> >believe UML has its own mime type).
> >
> See figure below and suggestion.
> 
> >
> >
> >Is there any reason that we should not allow for XML representations of
> >Core Components to be stored? Please note that this would not be the
> >same as an XML serialization for Core Components
> >
> I see no reason to disallow XML reps of CC to be stored.
> 
> >- an XML serialization
> >would "wrap" the StreetName element above with metadata from the CC spec
> >in XML form. This means we would need two "indicators":
> >
> >(1) ObjectType = "Core Component"
> >(2) Object Format = "XML" or "UML" (could use MimeType)
> >
> >
> >
> How about a hierarchy of ObjectType as follows:
> 
>                       Core Component
>                                    ^
>                                     |
>                  ------------------------------
>                  |                                    |
>     XML Core Componet        UML Core Component
> 
> --
> Farrukh
begin:vcard 
n:Chiusano;Joseph
tel;work:(703) 902-6923
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.bah.com
org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team
adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012;
version:2.1
email;internet:chiusano_joseph@bah.com
title:Senior Consultant
fn:Joseph M. Chiusano
end:vcard


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