RE: [ubl-dev] SBS and Restricted Data Types

[stephen.green@systml.co.uk]

Amen!


Quoting Fulton Wilcox <fulton.wilcox@coltsnecksolutions.com>:

>
> All:
>
> There is an economic equilibrium between the costs of working within a
> standard versus the cost of accommodating diversity. If implementing
> standards become more convoluted, the equilibrium shifts in favor of doing
> n-way direct translations.
>
> Therefore, what Dave described as "the one way is the true way" and "pure
> UBL" has little to do with truth and a lot to do with minimizing cost of
> adoption. If the number of particularities increases, the economic
> equilibrium flips in favor of "pure particularity."
>
> Probably any given particularity along the lines of Joe's original message
> (see below) is unlikely to trigger a shift in the economic equilibrium cited
> above. However, the accumulation of particularities and embellishments can
> have that effect.
>
> A further issue is that the "cost causers" who impose particularity often
> are not the "cost payers." For example, the hub in a hub and spoke trading
> relationship may impose particularities on what could easily be a "pure" UBL
> trading relationship. Of course, in response many prospective "spokes"
> exhibit great agility in avoiding or delaying adoption.
>
> Everyone involved in UBL has both a standards hat and one or more
> "particularity" hats. In the interest of the standard, there needs to be a
> healthy level of impedance to bringing particularity inside the standard.
>
>
> 					Fulton Wilcox
> 					Colts Neck Solutions LLC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 4:35 PM
> To: ubl-dev@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ubl-dev] SBS and Restricted Data Types
>
> Please pardon me if this question has been asked before on this list (my
> searches indicated the contrary):
>
> In terms of the SBS, what is the best way (if any) to restrict data
> types of a UBL schema for an specific implementation? Whether it is a
> 1.0 or 2.0 schema does not matter for purposes of this question (at
> least I don't believe so).
>
> For example, what if one had a need to define an xsd:minOccurs or
> xsd:maxOccurs facet for an xsd:string data type, for their own
> implementation?
>
> Thanks,
> Joe
>
> Joseph Chiusano
> Associate
> Booz Allen Hamilton
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> This publicly archived list supports open discussion on implementing 
> the UBL OASIS Standard. To minimize spam in the
> archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Alternately, using email: list-[un]subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> List archives: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-dev/
> Committee homepage: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ubl/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
> Join OASIS: http://www.oasis-open.org/join/
>
>