Re: [regrep] Implementing CCTS in Registry - further thoughts

[Matthew MacKenzie <matt@mac-kenzie.net>]

I think the best approach would be to define a generic XML structure to 
house the component, with some sort of indication saying "this core 
component is  atomic", or "this core component is a compount component, 
made up of | derived from |etc ...".

Haven't spent time on CCTS, but we may even be able to layer a namespace 
onto RELAX-NG or W3C schema to serialize a component...

-matt

Chiusano Joseph wrote:

>Regarding XML serialization:
>
>Given the metadata that is defined, wouldn't the XML representation of a
>Core Component, BIE, etc. amount to an XML fragment - i.e. a single tag
>such as <LocationName> or a set of tags such as <ResidenceAddress> and
>its contained elements?  I'm thinking that all of the metadata for the
>entity (as a whole) would be defined in the registry, not within the XML
>representation itself.  Please let me know if I'm missing something on
>this.  The caveat would be that it may not be well-formed XML.
>
>- Joe
>
>
>David RR Webber - XML ebusiness wrote:
>  
>
>>Message text written by Matthew MacKenzie
>>    
>>
>>I don't advocate people calling any home cooked XML or CSV a core
>>component in their XML registry...I think that will just muddy the waters.
>>
>><<<
>>
>>Matt,
>>
>>FYI - there are a dozen registries out there already with their
>>own XML formats for content.
>>
>>Having the ATG specify XML for an OASIS Registry IMHO
>>is a fraught path.
>>
>>My suggestion is a sub-team of Registry - and we have a
>>collaborative effort between the concerned parties:
>>
>>My list would include UBL, CAM, UDDI, CCTS, ATG, and
>>then other OASIS TC's that want to liaise, along with
>>invite to OAGI and DISA X12 to have an observer each.
>>
>>DW.
>>    
>>

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature