[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: tools requirements list (from last wseek's ssc discussion)
Hi Sylvia, I went and looked back through my notes on the ttsc meetings when Gunther was still chair, and it was in that timeframe (May/June of 2003) that all those requirements were discussed at length. I did find two sets of minutes from May (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/2815/ttsc_20030522.txt) and June (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/2816/ttsc_20030630.txt) that have a lot of discussion detail. The list you found during the ssc discussion last week is the original list that started the May/June discussion. In those meetings we did agree on those and Gunther even added more as shown in the June minutes, but really the idea was that Gunther was gonig to write something to meet those requirements. Obviously things didn't evolve that far. So I thingk we should just revisit this with where we are now. The prioritizations evident in the June minutes were based on the need to get something out the door and not needing to focus as much on external users - we ended up using Chee-Kai's tool in the end. Now the situation has changed as we have 1.0 out the door and are now addressing both internal development and something that users can also take advantage of if they like. But to that end we do need to consider some of the things that were on that requirements list as they are still considered pretty important. The priorities might have shifted, though. -A
ubl-ttsc message
[Date Prev <msg00006.html>] | [Thread Prev <msg00006.html>] | [Thread
Next <msg00008.html>] | [Date Next <msg00008.html>] -- [Date Index
<maillist.html#00007>] | [Thread Index <threads.html#00007>] | [List
Home </archives/ubl-ttsc/>]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [ubl-ttsc] Future steps of Tools and Techniques group
* From: Anne Hendry <anne.hendry@sun.com>
* To: "Stuhec, Gunther" <gunther.stuhec@sap.com>
* Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 22:41:36 -0700
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title:
Hi Gunther,
Here are the tools requirements we gathered in the LCSC F2F tools
discussion:
a) non-proprietary storage format
b) availability on multiple platforms
d) configurable to syntax rules
e) configurable to customization rules
f) provides version control
g) requires no manual editing
h) supports XMI change format
i) is an integrated tool set
j) provides collabortive central source repository
k) enforces a controlled vocabulary
l) provides a single data/source repository
m) low (no) cost
These are not in priority order.
When we talk about requirements, we must specify the audience,
(although in the LCSC discussion, the audience was not specifically
mentioned). However, there are two possible audiences I am aware of:
- the UBL TC members who are building the release
- future developers who will be using UBL in their work
The requirements of the two groups are not 100% overlapping.
Perhaps there are other audiences I'm not aware of. Perhaps
we don't have the resources to do more than one. We should
discuss this first to make sure we have the right requirements.
In terms of meeting schedule, Tuesdays are difficult because the
LCSC meetings are Tuesdays at 8 PT. QA meetings are Fridays
at 8 PT, but I'm not sure if that will change. Thursdays I have
another meeting at 9 PT, but before that is fine.
-Anne
Stuhec, Gunther wrote:
> Hello members of the TTSC,
>
> I do not really know if I'm the actual chair of the TTSC, or not.
> Normally, I should be. Jon told in a mail on Friday, if any voting
> member should have any objects to this adoption of this resolution,
> she ore he should register this objection not later than 7 May 2003.
>
> Unit the May of 7th, I would like to plan with you the plan of our
> future steps, because it is necessary that we start with our work as
> soon as possible.
>
> The charter of the TTSC says that the TTSC evaluates and recommends
> the tools and techniques to be used in the development, quality
> assurance, documentation, maintenances, and revision of the UBL XML
> data formats, and write and maintain guidelines reflecting these
> recommendations.
>
> I guess, the TTSC should do although a proof of concept of all
> decisions of NDRSC and LCSC during the evaluation phase. Because it is
> not very useful to look, how we can implement all rules in any kind of
> way into a tool, interface or application. It is better, if we
> analyse, how we can implement the UBL XML data formats into the tools,
> interfaces or applications in a very efficient way. That means that we
> report all our results and suggestions of our proof of concepts to the
> NDRSC or LCSC that they can do their further steps on in, immediately.
>
> The TTSC should analyze the following tools, the next time:
> - Modelling systems
> - based on XML Schemas (like XML Spy)
> - based on UML Class Diagrams or graphical representation of
> the core components (may be based on SVG)
> - Storage systems
> - native XML Databases
> - flat file
> - SQL Databases?
> - Transformation systems
> - Tools for writing efficient XSLT scripts for transforming
> into HTML or another kind XML based business language
>
> - Intefaces generation systems
> - Automatic generation of Java-Classes
> - Automatic generation of C++-Classes
> - Automatic generation of Perl-Classes
> - Tools for generating user interfaces automatically, which
> are based on UBL XML Schemas
> - Schema generation systems
> - Generation of UBL based XML Schemas from UML tools,
> Excel-spreadsheet, Java, C++, Perl-Classes or vice versa.
>
> We should proof:
> - which tools are useful for our requirements?
> - which features of the tools are useful for our requirements?
> - which steps can be done manually or automatically?
> - which features must be added for our requirements?
> - which developments must we do (tools, functions) that we can use UBL
> XML in this tools?
> - which NDR rules must be changed that we can use UBL XML more
> efficiently in this tools?
>
> Following steps are necessary:
> - establish weekly telephone conference (1 - 2 hours) (may be Monday,
> Tuesday, Thursday or Friday). The starting time should be 7 or 8'o
> clock californian time
>
> - define a time schedule for our aims
> - find volunteers, which are responsbile for modelling systems,
> storage systems, transformations systems, interfaces, automatic schema
> generation
>
> It would be nice, if I can get further suggestions for the tools or
> our TTSC.
>
> I guess, we should start with our first telephone conference, next
> week. Until this telephone conference, I will prepare a formal
> proposal of our time schedule.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Gunther
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* References:
o Future steps of Tools and Techniques group <msg00006.html>
+ From: "Stuhec, Gunther" <gunther.stuhec@sap.com>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Date Prev <msg00006.html>] | [Thread Prev <msg00006.html>] | [Thread
Next <msg00008.html>] | [Date Next <msg00008.html>] -- [Date Index
<maillist.html#00007>] | [Thread Index <threads.html#00007>] | [List
Home </archives/ubl-ttsc/>]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]