Re: [ubl-dev] Re: Global elements doing UBL a disservice

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

I'm going to chime in briefly to get a better understand of needs ... 
but I don't have a comment on substitution groups, but on 
extensibility.  This impacts the work I'm trying to do with 
extensibility in UBL.

At 2006-05-19 16:55 +0800, Chin Chee-Kai wrote:
>On schema extensibility, end-users defer extensions to developers
>and implementors, who then seek compatible ways to implement those
>business extensions.

Fine ...

>Schema has a couple of ways to allow that.

But with the recent efforts of Steve and Joe to demonstrate on this 
list any extensibility using W3C Schema features, I think it is clear 
the features are not sufficient to the task.

If developers and implementers implemented the business extensions 
solely within the new extension point being provided in the next 
draft UBL 2 then there (1) won't be a need to shoehorn insufficient 
validation facilities and (2) implementations will be true to the 
compatibility measurement with UBL 2 because all instances will 
continue to validate according to the normative UBL 2 schemas 
regardless of the embedded extensions.

I feel this compatibility test will promote interoperability and I 
believe these benefits will outweigh possible implementation concerns.

. . . . . . Ken

--
Registration open for XSLT/XSL-FO training: Wash.,DC 2006-06-12/16
Also for XSL-FO/XSLT training:    Minneapolis, MN 2006-07-31/08-04
Also for XML/XSLT/XSL-FO/UBL training: Varo,Denmark 06-09-25/10-06
World-wide corporate, govt. & user group UBL, XSL, & XML training.
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal