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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl message

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

Subject: [ubl] Minutes for UBL Naming and Design Rules meeting 7 November 2001

I will be forwarding the weekly minutes of the Naming and Design Rules SC 
to the whole TC to avoid the potential of "isolation" that I described last 
week.  Items to note below:

- We will be compiling an issue outline from many excellent sources.
- Leading up to December 10, we will give top priority to issues of
   customization and vendor support.
- We have identified W3C XML Schema validators that we will test

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.  Thanks!


>Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:06:39 -0500
>From: "Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>
>Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for UBL Naming and Design Rules meeting 7 
>November 2001
>To: ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org
>List-Archive: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc>
>Please review these minutes and bring up any problems on the list before 
>our next meeting on 14 November.  BTW, I will be forwarding our minutes to 
>the whole ubl list so that they stay in touch with what we're doing.
>1. Roll call (quorum is 8)
>    Bill Burcham         YES
>    Doug Bunting         YES
>    Dave Carlson         YES
>    Matt Gertner         YES
>    Mark Crawford        YES
>    Jack Gager
>    Arofan Gregory       YES (joined at x:18)
>    Eduardo Gutentag
>    Eve Maler            YES
>    Dale McKay           YES
>    Sue Probert
>    Marion Royal
>    Kelly Schwarzhoff
>    Gunther Stuhec       YES
>    Mike Rawlins
>    Quorum reached by x:12
>2. Acceptance of minutes of 30 October - 1 November 2001 meeting:
>    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200111/msg00000.html
>    Accepted.
>3. Adoption of today's agenda
>    We agreed to drop the "discuss issues" agenda item formally, though we
>    may discuss it briefly in a "meta" fashion.
>4. Review and develop our issue outline in light of the analysis inputs;
>    I think we're going to want to number our issues for easy reference
>    We agreed that it's a good approach to use all of our analysis inputs
>    to form a master outline (and Mark has the perfect history to do this!).
>    We also agreed to populate the outline, where possible, with answers
>    that other groups have come up with.
>    When Mark presents us with a draft populated outline, we will review
>    it at that point.
>    We discussed how position papers should be marked up.  Vanilla Word,
>    plain text, and vanilla HTML are okay, with Word preferred by Mark.
>    Only .JPG and .GIF graphics should be produced.
>    ACTION: Mark to deliver the draft by Monday COB.
>    ACTION: Mark to send out a Word template for champions to use.
>    ACTION: Eve to create NDR SC web page with analysis inputs linked by
>    Friday COB.
>5. Prioritize the issues that we need to resolve by December 10
>    Subsetting XSD is probably the thing that is most needed, so that
>    vendors can determine as soon as possible what they need to support.
>    In some cases, we may need a feature so badly that spotty vendor
>    support won't stop our recommending this, so this will clue them in
>    to work on supporting it.  In other cases, if leading vendors support
>    a feature but others don't, and we decide it's worth the risk to
>    recommend it, smaller vendors will be on notice.
>    Here are the XSD parsers we will pay attention to and the people who
>    will run test cases:
>    Top tier (feature support matters to us):
>      Xerces-J (leading in XSD support): Arofan/Kelly
>      Xerces-C++ (lagging a bit): Dave
>      XML Spy: Gunther
>      Tibco Extensibility (high price, instability, and lack of features
>        mean that we can live with lack of support of this one alone):
>        Dale
>    Second tier (we'll check as we have time, and sometimes these are
>    the only ones that implement a certain feature):
>      W3C XSV (not production quality, but usually most conforming):
>        Arofan or Dave
>      IBM Alphaworks XML Schema Checker (not production quality)
>    We will put future versions of Apache Crimson and MSXML on a "tools
>    to watch" list.  The champion of any one issue will be responsible
>    for creating or finding a test file.
>    ACTION: Eve to pursue the question of the XSD conformance suite with
>    Kohsuke Kawaguchi.
>    ACTION: Eve to determine whether there are plans to make Crimson
>    handle XSD.
>    ACTION: Doug to look into whether we should add MSXML to our list.
>    ACTION: Eve to locate the W3C/Microsoft validation effort and send
>    a link to the list.
>    We also think that the customization strategy needs to be decided
>    as soon as possible, so that the Library Content and Context
>    Methodology SCs aren't blocked.
>6. Discuss issues (might need to change this list if our prioritizing
>    exercise gives us different results or if position papers aren't
>    available):
>    - Modularization/namespaces/versioning
>    - Local vs. global elements
>    - Elements vs. attributes
>    We deferred this item.
>7. Next steps
>    Next week we will review the draft outline in detail, prioritize in
>    detail, and hopefully begin discussing the position papers we have in
>    hand.
>8. Adjourn
>    Adjourned at y:05.
>Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
>Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com

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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC