RE: [ubl-dev] infinite loop

["David RR Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

Tim,

Concur - I believe that was the business point I was making - and hence this begs the question - why are they there?  The answer appears to be completely technical - and not business purpose.

As Steve notes - I would much prefer to refactor these to remove the direct recursive links and instead put an association connection

so instead of

 <Organization>

    <Person/>

 </Organization>

you have

 <Organization>

     <PersonAssociation Id="value"/>

 </Organization>

Thanks, DW

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] infinite loop
From: Tim McGrath <tim.mcgrath@documentengineeringservices.com>
Date: Fri, June 25, 2010 4:17 pm
To: stephengreenubl@gmail.com
Cc: "David RR Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info>, "G. Ken Holman"
<gkholman@cranesoftwrights.com>, UBL-Dev <ubl-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>

surely the real practical answer here is that... yes, you can have
infinite loops (as in any hierarchical data structures) - but why would
you?

if we can stop thinking as designers and think as users you realize
no-one would ever do this in their invoices, order, etc... As long as
there is optionality on the associations then the depth is arbitrary.

the only times this ever comes up as an issue seems to be when people
use tools that generate sample documents - which is an artificial
experience anyway.


Stephen Green wrote:
> It seems reasonable to conclude that the standard
> part of UBL is loose enough to allow most kinds of
> use. To actually use it you probably need more than
> just the standard. You need to further restrict it e.g.
> to restrict the number of nestings of AgentParty.
> There are standard ways to do this. Ken and I first
> produced a subset by listing elements using XPaths.
> David led a standard for restricting documents, also
> involving XPath and called CAM. I edited an in progress
> potential standard which can also be used with XPath to
> define restrictions and that is called test assertion
> markup language. Ken led some of the work to
> standardise a more prevalent , similar technology to add
> restrictions beyond the schema called Schematron when
> it was standardised in ISO. All these help restrict
> UBL with rules or assertions beyond what the standard
> requires but to meet typical requirements for implementing it.
> Worth looking into all this, I expect.
>
> Regards
> Stephen D Green
>
>
>

---

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org