Re: [ubl-dev] UBL Document V Just Supporting Schema

[Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>]

Depends what you mean by 'legitimate'.

IMO it is historical accident that so much emphasis has
been placed on the schema. I personally see a schema
as an easy entry level tool as well as an XML datatypes
definition. The casual, time-constrained developer can
get a hold of a schema and start writing software for it.
The same developer, if worth his/her salt, would not think
that what they have written could be called 'legitimate'.
The schema lets you write a 'hello world' application just
as a few minutes with a C or Java compiler and a 'quick
start' guide would have you writing such code. I do wish
that was all there was to being a software developer but
it is the first rough lesson that there is a lot more to it
than that. Really they need the spec and an implement-
ation guide of sorts. So we have conformance profiles
like NES and lists like ubl-dev for filling the gaps, if any.

In my opinion I would see the schema as a set of test
assertions which provides the low hanging fruit of proper
document engineeering or software engineering for the
documents. Next step is conformance profile(s) and
proper test assertions.

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=tag

Easy enough to write test assertions to say things like
' the root of the instance is a root element as defined
by a conformant document schema' or to put that into
an XPath expression using an Test Assertions XPath
profile. This would accompany other test assertions and
augment the schema in support of a conformance profile.
Then a test suite tests proper conformance. Maybe a
test bed too like the one being planned by GITB.

Best regards

Steve

Stephen D Green



2009/6/20  <jaymuz@optusnet.com.au>:
> If I stumble across "xsd/common/UBL-CommonBasicComponents-2.0.xsd", "xsd/maindoc/UBL-Invoice-2.0.xsd, and "SystML-SimpleDocument-2.xsd", having nothing else to refer to other than the UBL zip file pack and W3 standads, how do I know which are "UBL 2.0 Documents Schema" and which are what might be termed "Other and / or Supporting UBL 2 schema".?
>
> [You could construct an XML instance of cbc:AcceptedIndicator for example - couldn't you - and that would be a legitimate document in terms of the UBL .xsd docs themselves - wouldn't it?]
>
> John
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>