[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
against.
Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thanks!
Eve
>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