[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XML CMM ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to

• To: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>,xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XML CMM ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• From: pop3 <lbradshaw@d...>
• Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 19:50:16 -0400
• In-reply-to: <3F4B0EF9.7080207@a...>
• References: <5.1.1.5.2.20030825113229.02e093c8@m...><5.1.1.5.2.20030825113229.02e093c8@m...>

hmmm

you lost me at "It is not correct to oppose dynamic process quality and 
dynamic process quality in this way."

did I miss something?

thanks

At 05:40 PM 8/26/2003 +1000, Rick Jelliffe wrote:
>pop3 wrote:
>
>>Unlike a printed page, an automated document, like any other automated 
>>data system, is dynamic and subject to change driven by external 
>>requirements that are by definition in flux. Assuming that a static state 
>>anywhere in the automated document process is acceptable is not valid IMHO.
>
>Since XML is merely syntax, all these comments really concern either 
>heirachical databases or perhaps schema
>languages for XML AFAIKS. (You can send relational data in tables using 
>XML, so it is utterly incorrect to
>postulate that any property of relational system is impossible with XML. 
>Getting terminology correct is a good
>place to start. That an XML document is an AVT with cross-links does not 
>mean that that XML document
>necessarily contain a heirarchical database nor a relational database. 
>Nor, indeed, any kind of database--in the
>sense of a collection of facts about things--at all.)
>
>>Sure, you might be able to make it work today. Or even tomorrow. But 
>>working for 20 years, or longer, is not likely to be viable because the 
>>maintenance and additional work requirements are likely to change in as 
>>yet unknown ways, driving costs that can be shown to be at least linear 
>>and more likely exponentially increasing over time.
>>
>>That kind of outcome is precisely what TQM and then PE (process 
>>engineering) and now ISO 9000 and CMM have tried to avoid.
>
>ISO 9000-3 Guidelines for applying ISO 9001 1994 to Computer Software
>ISO 9001:1994 Model for quality assurance in design, development, 
>production, installation and servicing
>ISO 9126:2000 Software Engineering: Product Quality
>
>It is not correct to oppose dynamic process quality and dynamic process 
>quality in this way.
>
>Indeed, ISO 9126 (which is concerned with quality as measurable at 
>particular instants)
>specifically mentions in part 1, 1, note 3 "This ... can be used in 
>conjunction with ISO 9001
>(which is concerned with quality assurance processes) to provide:
>* support for setting quality goals
>* support for design review, verification and validation."
>
>The schema languages for XML provide clear support for many of the 
>requirements of
>ISO 9000. For example, it clearly provides assistance for ISO 9001 s 4.4 
>Software development
>and design, and s4.10 Product inspection and testing.
>
>XML allows validation against evolving schemas. You can readily determine 
>whether a change
>to a schema is backwards compatible against existing documents (i.e. 
>either because of the kind
>of change, or by revalidating old documents). This fits in completely with 
>s4.20, Statistic
>Techniques, which deals with metrics.
>
>XML allows 
>verification/validation/mesaurement/expressing-of-customer-requirements,
>and, at the system design level, XML's web/document orientation allows a 
>dataflow/routing
>approach (e.g. SOAP) which entirely fits in with ISO 9001's requirement 
>for, e.g., remedial
>systems as a separately considered part of the process.
>
>I see XML validation as being *extremely* consistent with the ISO 9126 
>approach, b.t.w.
>
>Cheers
>Rick Jelliffe
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML CMM ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approachto glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>

• References:
  • XML CMM ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
    • From: pop3 <lbradshaw@d...>
  • Re: XML CMM ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approachto glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML and the Relational Model (was Re: A standard approach to glueing together ...)
• Next by Date: Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Previous by thread: Re: XML CMM ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approachto glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Next by thread: Re: XML CMM ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approachto glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread