Re: [regrep] [Fwd: [xml-dev] Extract A Subset of a W3C XML Schema?]

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

<Quote1>
it's a bit more complex that that. 
</Quote1>

Yes - that was only one specific example of several that I could have
provided.

<Quote2>
cadinality changes with the context and the order in which contexts are
applied. 
</Quote2>

Simple - the CCTS has a "cardinality" property for BIEs as well as CCs.
So once context is applied to a BCC (thereby making it a BBIE), the
"context-specific" cardinality can be specified along with the BBIE.

Regarding order: would you happen to have a specific use case? This
would be valuable for us in the CC Review subcommittee.

Joe

Duane Nickull wrote:
> 
> Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> 
> ><Quote2>
> >Problems occur with respect to cardinality rules and context.  Is
> >"Address" the same within the context of a mapping source if it occurs
> >within a heirarchic context of //PO/ShipperParty than when it occurs in
> >//PO/BuyerParty? I think not..
> ></Quote2>
> >
> >Absolutely - this is part of our Core Components work as well. For
> >example, a Basic Core Component (BCC) will have a "Cardinality"
> >attribute (represented through one or more Slots) that describes whether
> >the BCC is optional, mandatory, or repetitive within an Aggregate Core
> >Component (ACC). We have also discussed expanding this concept to allow
> >for the minimum or maximum *number* of occurrences to be specified as
> >well.
> >
> [DN] it's a bit more complex that that.  Matt Mackenzie (from Yellow
> Dragon Software) and I have built some PoC stuff like this.  The problem
> is that the cadinality changes with the context and the order in which
> contexts are applied.  We have shared some of this with Arofan Gregory.
> 
> To further cite the above example, if it is a ship-to address, there may
> have to be two (a postal and billing address).
> 
> >Absolutely - the Core Components RIM binding (CCRIM) that we are working
> >on will be a very large benefit to our current architecture.
> >
> This architecture vision is written in the new UN/CEFACT eBusiness
> Architecture.  Core Components called it an "Assembly Doc" - sort of a
> metaschema or schema for creating a schema.
> 
> It can be done today.  If someone is willing to fund further
> development, I am sure a publicly addressible working system can be done
> within 4 months.
> 
> Duane
> 
> ***************************************************
> Yellow Dragon Software - http://www.yellowdragonsoft.com
> Web Services & ebXML Messaging / Registry Downloads
> Project Team Lead - UN/CEFACT eBusiness Architecture
> Phone:   +1 (604) 738-1051 - Canada: Pacific Standard Time
> Direct:  +1 (604) 726-3329
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