RE: [ubl-lcsc] Re: [ubl-ndrsc] xsd:documentation vs xsd:appinfo

["CRAWFORD, Mark" <MCRAWFORD@lmi.org>]

Chee-Kai wrote 
> ====================
> We have a stated rule to follow W3C guideline, and it
> is to use <appinfo>.  Any concerns with use of <appinfo>
> should be done with XML Schema Working Group, not with
> UBL TC.  Members who strongly feel that <appinfo> causes
> security concerns should join XML Schema Working Group,
> get it thrashed out and with opposing points debated,
> then get a new version of XML Schema addressing those
> issues at schema level.  
> 
> Once that is done (if it happens at all), applications 
> claiming conformance to that new XML Schema spec would
> automatically be safe, and businesses would feel better
> about using those applications.
> 
We are under no obligation to use a particular feature of XSD, only to use XSD.  We have made many decisions regarding the appropriateness of using certain features - that is what NDR is all about.  

Chee-Kai wrote -
> Conclusion
> ==========
> My conclusion is that that conclusion made by NDR not
> so very long ago is not an appropriate way to address those
> valid concerns.  Users and businesses do not choose to
> adopt UBL just because UBL has "safely" stored data in
> <documentation>, but because UBL does the right thing.

Exactly.  And we, as NDR determined that the right thing was to avoid the use of AppInfo to ensure broadest market appeal.  I have a business case that says that we will loose part of our audience if we include normative AppInfo in our schema.