Re: [regrep] Core Components - Revisited

["Nikola" <nikola.stojanovic@acm.org>]

<Joe>
Thanks Farrukh. Would you be willing to elaborate on one point:

<Quote>
Experience with many pilots suggests that the best approach is to have
an XML format for CCTS content with ebRIM format for CCTS metdata. So I
would reccomend both XML serialization format (outside of binding) and
binding to ebRIM metadata.
</Quote>

It would be very helpful.
</Joe>

(NB: I might misinterpret some CC related facts):

I'd like to enumerate some steps that might help with defining the scope.
One can assume that this is possible:

[1] CCTS abstract model -> RIM

This is what I think Joe is referring to as "RIM binding". I'd say this
could be sufficient. Subteam certainly shouldn't attempt this:

[2] CCTS abstract model -> CCTS instantiation models

Here I assume that something like UBL would be a member of "CCTS
instantiation models".

And, subteam doesn't need to address this:

[3] CCTS instantiation models  -> RIM

I thought that subteam might need to address [3], but I see that this is not
necessary, because implementations of [3] would (should) be constrained by
[1].

Regards,
Nikola