[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Candidate decision regarding code list support publishing
In today's face-to-face we spent a good part of the afternoon talking about the new additional code list resources and the code list revision policy. To prepare to make decisions, this post summarizes where I think we reached in our discussions. We will decide on this later on during the week. (1) - I have prepared context/value association files used to recreate the and I have published these to the Kavi directory, but during the meeting I did not remember that these actually have been published; they can be found here: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=23531 (2) - the code list support files will be more useful if they are posted to the UBL docs repository, since their relative XPath addresses can point to the actual code lists - these support files are not for all users of UBL, and in fact are not for many users of UBL ... most users will be using either defaultCodeList.xsl or the XSLT stylesheet that users of the support files create for their use (3) - as new code lists are produced, it makes sense to publish these lists and their support files as subdirectories of the UBL docs repository so that at any time a developer can download from the repository *all* versions of *all* code lists in the UBL history so that a developer can create their own context/value association files - it is not necessary to duplicate the publishing of unchanged lists since all of the subdirectories are in the UBL docs repository - for any support release of new code lists there will be a new version of defaultCodeList.xsl published so that UBL users can always obtain the latest default second-pass validation without having to use the methodology to make it - there is currently a UBL 2.0 code list directory: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/cl/ - two of those code list files are the country code list and the transportation status code list: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/cl/gc/default/CountryIdentificationCode-2.0.gc http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/cl/gc/default/TransportationStatusCode-2.0.gc - there is a fault in the country identification code list for Bosnia, so we should publish a repaired version as an erratum - say we decided to publish a new code list support package in February 2007 (a past date for illustration purposes) for the erratum ... we would have the new code list, the new context/value association file that overrides the old context-value association file, and the new resulting defaultCodeList.xsl in a revision subdirectory: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/cl-200702/gc/default/CountryIdentificationCode-2.0.gc http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/cl-200702/cva/defaultCodeList.cva http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/cl-200702/defaultCodeList.xsl http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/cl-200702.zip - following that date there might be a new transportation status list (the current version is "Third Revision", the next version we might want to call "4" to use numbers instead of words for the meta data) that has new values - say we decided to publish a new code list support package in March 2007 for the addition ... this would again have the required support files, a new context/value association file that *supplements* (not overrides) the old context-value association file, and the new resulting defaultCodeList.xsl in a revision subdirectory: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/cl-200703/gc/default/TransportationStatusCode-2.0.gc http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/cl-200703/cva/defaultCodeList.cva http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/cl-200703/defaultCodeList.xsl http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/cl-200703.zip - note that the cl-200703.zip file would contain the cl-200702 and cl-200703 directories, such that a developer need only download the latest ZIP file to get *all* of the code list directories since the publishing of os-UBL-2.0 ... this way each dated directory need only have the changed files and not all files - in the above examples we would not be limited to only changing one list at a time: any time we publish a new code list dated directory, it would contain all of the changes for that date - users wanting the latest defaultCodeList.xsl just goes to the latest dated subdirectory and obtain their file ... nothing else is needed for them to get default second-pass validation - developers wanting the latest materials to make the latest defaultCodeList.xsl would download the latest ZIP file and the os-UBL-2.0.zip package ... unzipping both of these in their development directories ensures the relative paths are all correct In preparing this I have these questions we need to answer: (Q1) - when do we set this up and get started? - genericode 1.0 is about to go to Public Review - the methodology will be finalized at 1.0 only after genericode 1.0 is finalized - should we wait to set all this support stuff up once both are finalized at 1.0? (Q2) - how often do we publish the code list directory? - perhaps we can schedule new code list directories every 6 months (4 months?) from December 2007 which should give us the time to shake out the approach before then and it is on the first anniversary of the specification's release (Q3) - does it make sense for a developer to find everything in the latest ZIP file, or should the above be changed such that there is no duplication and each ZIP directory has only the files in that directory: this makes more downloads for the developer, but for the developer who is following development step by step they only download the latest and unpacking it won't overwrite any of their existing files ... the more I think about it, the more I think each ZIP file should only have the files of that directory (Q4) - note that the genericode filenames used above are ambiguous ... is this a problem? The files are distinguished by the subdirectories in which they are found, and by the meta data found therein ... do we need to go the extra step of distinguishing the file names, and if so, how do we do this in a consistent fashion? My gut feel is that we do not and that directory context is enough ... if a file is found out of context, the contents reveal the meta data My initial assessment is that all of the above is achievable and will mechanically work, but is it too complicated? I think not since we will always have a simple defaultCodeList.xsl that anyone can download with all of the hard work done. Anyone who needs to use the validation methodology will already be familiar with how the methodology works. Having these files in multiple directories shouldn't scare them off since all of the relative directories work. Thanks to everyone for their input at today's meeting ... it was very productive and the questions were very astute. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ken -- Upcoming hands-on training(Europe 2007): XSL-FO Jun 11; UBL Oct 01 World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training RSS feeds: publicly-available developer resources and training G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/ Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995) Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05 http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]