OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl-ndrsc message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [ubl-ndrsc] XPath futures


 > I came away with the impression that we should feel confirmed in our
 > wariness of schema-aware software
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Did you mean "schema-aware software" or "type-aware software"?


Eve L. Maler wrote:
> While at the CSW XML Summer School last week (giving a UBL tutorial and 
> therefore missing the UBL F2F), I attended an XSLT Expert Forum, where 
> Jeni Tennison, Sebastian Rahtz, Bob DuCharme, and others reviewed the 
> state of the art in XSLT/XPath V1.0 and where it's going in V2.0.  I 
> thought it might be useful to share some of the information I learned 
> there, since it relates to our previous global/local discussions in UBL. 
>  (Apologies if you all know this already.)  I do *not* mean to bring up 
> old discussions for re-decision, merely provide context.
> 
> One of the rationales that I gave for supporting global elements was 
> that if you wanted to reuse local-only UBL for making your own document 
> types, the "head" of a tree of reuse would require a mapping from the 
> UBL type to a foreign element, even if the type needed no changes. 
> (Below the "head", the elements would be in the UBL namespace, not the 
> foreign one.)  This means that non-type-aware technologies such as XPath 
> V1.0 would require changes to existing stylesheets/programs to change 
> the "head" element's name if nothing else.
> 
> We in UBL have been assuming that, since XPath and XSLT V2.0 will be 
> type-aware, this problem will be solved at some point in the near 
> future, potentially blunting this rationale.  However, I learned that 
> XPath and XSLT V2.0 have conformance levels, and the higher level -- the 
> schema-aware one -- doesn't look like it will be very common at all. W3C 
> standardization is, optimistically, 9-12+ months away, depending on the 
> appearance of implementations.  And there continues to be a lot of 
> controversy in the XML development community around the usage of the 
> Post-Schema Validation Infoset (PSVI)...
> 
> I came away with the impression that we should feel confirmed in our 
> wariness of schema-aware software when trying to attend to our "various 
> and sundry" principle.
> 
> For what it's worth,
> 
>     Eve
> 

-- 
Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
Web Technologies and Standards |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 x31442
Sun Microsystems Inc.          |
W3C AC Rep / OASIS TAB Chair



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]