[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Re: [ebxml-msg] FW: Versioning and Compatibility Issues from ebXML JC
Dale, I would also like noted the vital role that the CAM specification plays in this too. While obviously there are different use cases - having CAM templates for schemas significantly enhances your ability to version and track changes - and more importantly - add context - to the structural nuances within the schema changes. Also - in terms of things like ISO11179 - CAM provides you with a registry-centric way of implementing such vocabulary alignments. Certainly in terms of providing well structured ebXML transactions - including CAM as a means to ensure that is clearly something we should be indicating to implementers as available technology that works with the ebXML stack. Thanks, DW. Chair OASIS CAM TC. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Monica Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com> To: "Dale Moberg" <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com> Cc: <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org>; <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>; "ebXML IIC - main list (E-mail)" <ebxml-iic@lists.oasis-open.org>; <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>; <ebxml-jc@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Karl F. Best" <karl.best@oasis-open.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 3:10 AM Subject: [regrep] Re: [ebxml-msg] FW: Versioning and Compatibility Issues from ebXML JC > > >Moberg: (1) We feel there is a need for an OASIS-wide way to implement shema > >versioning and documentation across OASIS approved schemas. > >More generally, specifications should include a formal representation > >of their version number, e.g. using a common XML document format. > >All this would make it easier to obtain, query, and process the > >version number of an implementation. > > > >(2) We also feel there is a need for a common way to represent > >compatibility links to other specs. While the ebXML Joint Technical > >Liaison Team is developing an ebXML standards compatibility matrix, a > >more formal way to code a compatibility matrix (for integration as well as > >interoperability) is required across OASIS, ideally a model that could be processed by a > >tool and well understood across specifications. > > > mm1: Dale, Two suggestions: > 1. On versioning, you may wish to ask Karl Best, because a small team > that spawned from the interoperability sessions that took place in 2002 > developed a set of 15 or so data elements relevant to the description of > a standard in a conformant fashion. This took into account the source > of the specification, version, etc. This may be more comprehensive that > you may require (but may give you the relevant subset that you need). I > believe it was also based on the review of ISO 11179. This information > about the specification is really metadata to query the approved > schema/specification. Perhaps you can learn from this work. See Karl as > I don't believe I have a copy of their output. Karl can answer if this > metadata recommendation is being used in the development of the XML > registry for OASIS. > > 2. Perhaps this can be an enhancement to information in #1. > > Thanks. > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php. > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]