Re: [regrep] Impact of ICG Adoption on CCRIM SC (Was:[regrep]UN/CEFACT-ICG adopts freebXML Registry)

[Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>]

Performance has been studied exhaustively.

It is far easier to iterate through second level elements in the DOM 
matching attribute values that accessing a deeply nested element in a 
DOM tree.

//using jbuilder v 8

String myValue = 
toString(root.getChild("Properties).getAttributeValue("assertedBy"));

if (myValue = myToken){
  //do what you need to do here
}

This is as simple and perfomance enhanced as it gets.

Duane

David RR Webber wrote:

> Duane,
>
> We also need to consider performance issues.
>
> Before we pass something over to CEFACT that looks like a 
> recommendation - we need to attach
> some caveats.
>
> I don't think they should look at this than anything more than some 
> initial fact gathering.
>
> My concern is that engines need to be able to optimize retrieval - and 
> certainly that is difficult if
> everything is attribute based.  It makes it almost impossible to 
> reference things by XPath to
> limit sections of the structure that may only be needed - especially 
> thru a http-binding - which is
> obviously preferred for speed over SOAP requests.
>
> The i/o speed is going to be critical for the success of this - so we 
> need to plan for that and
> develop accordingly.
>
> These are the kind of things we should be helping CEFACT with - before 
> we jump ahead
> and recommend structures for storage....
>
> Thanks, DW
> ===============================================
>
> Duane Nickull wrote:
>
>> Kathryn:
>>
>> I have cc'd some of the UN/CEFACT folks.  I will present this 
>> document during our next telecon so we can kick off the process.  I 
>> would like to have the one review before we publich this.  In the 
>> meantime, I will retitle the document "Recommendations to UN/CEFACT 
>> for the storage of Core Components and BIE's in an ebXML 
>> Registry-Repository".
>> They will then be able to absorb whatever parts of it into their work 
>> they need to.
>>
>> Duane
>>
>> Breininger, Kathryn R wrote:
>>
>>> We can approve it as a committee approved document.  Basic steps are:
>>>
>>> 1. Present the document at one of our telecons (just an overview/intro)
>>> 2. TC reviews for 2 weeks, sends comments
>>> 3. Comments are resolved
>>> 4. At the next telecon, TC agrees to vote on the document as a best
>>> practices paper
>>> 5. Two week ballot is set up by TC Chair for TC voting
>>> 6. If TC approves, the document becomes a TC approved document, and is
>>> posted for public view.
>>>
>>> Let me know when you feel it is ready to present and I will add it to
>>> the agenda.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Kathryn.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] Sent: Monday, 
>>> September 20, 2004 8:49 AM
>>> Cc: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
>>> Subject: Re: [regrep] Impact of ICG Adoption on CCRIM SC (Was:
>>> [regrep]UN/CEFACT-ICG adopts freebXML Registry)
>>>
>>>
>>> I actually also suggested this to Mark Crawford and others when I 
>>> was in
>>>
>>> DC.  I think it makes sense.
>>>
>>> Before we do this, I would like to wrap the work up slightly.  The 
>>> easiest way to do this is to change the title to something like 
>>> "Recommendations to UN/CEFACT for storage of Core Components in an 
>>> ebXML
>>>
>>> Registry/Repository" and then approve it as a best practices 
>>> document within the TC.
>>>
>>> I am not sure what process we, as a TC, need to go through to 
>>> approve this as a non normative document.
>>>
>>> Kathryn?
>>>
>>> Duane
>>>
>>> Farrukh Najmi wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>> One important thing I did not mention is that UN/CEFACT is now doing
>>>> two things as part of their ICG Architecture:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Define a normative expression syntax in XML for Core Components
>>>>
>>>> 2. Define a normative mapping from CCTS Information Model to ebXML
>>>> Registry Information Model
>>>>
>>>> These were 2 important specification that SHOULD have been done by
>>>> CCTS but since they were not we chartered CCRIM SC to do these.
>>>> Now that UN/CEFACT teams are committed to doing this work I propose 
>>>> that the CCTS team donate their current work-in-progress as input 
>>>> (along with any recommendations) to the UN/CEFACT ICG and CCTS 
>>>> teams and recharter to become the liaison and consultant to those 
>>>> teams as they define and finalize these two tasks.
>>>>
>>>> Duane and others colleagues. What do you think of this idea?
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the 
>>> roster of
>>> the OASIS TC), go to
>>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgr 
>>>
>>> oup.php.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster 
>> of the OASIS TC), go to 
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php. 
>>
>>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster 
> of the OASIS TC), go to 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php. 
>
>