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

RE: [ubl-dev] Re: Code List Value Validation

• To: xml-dev@l..., ubl-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: [ubl-dev] Re: Code List Value Validation
• From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@C...>
• Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:20:08 -0400
• In-reply-to: <20060411060023.dc066b1d4d2e0a1a65719ae85a8071e6.5f8f7a3a5d.wbe@e...>
• References: <20060411060023.dc066b1d4d2e0a1a65719ae85a8071e6.5f8f7a3a5d.wbe@e...>

At 2006-04-11 06:00 -0700, David RR Webber \(XML\) wrote:
>OK - got it.  I'm going to re-factor this some - and send some
>alternative suggestions.

REFACTOR?  Sorry, David ... genericode files are under Tony's purview 
... I would suggest you indicate to Tony what your needs are and have 
him suggest ways genericode files can address the needs.

>I note your concern with speed - I think we can re-do the XML slightly -
>keep all the same functionality but make it both much faster to process
>- and much easier on the eye-balls for humans to grok.

Again, I'm lost David ... where were my concerns with speed, and 
where are there eyeball problems with what XML you are speaking 
of?  This work is the considered result of some effort ... not the 
arbitrary throwing together of markup.

>Will post something tomorrow - have chunk of project work to get done
>today...

I'm interested to see what you'll be posting.

I note this thread has been happening on both XML-Dev and UBL-Dev, 
and while the discussion of genericode files is appropriate for both 
(Tony's work is used in many places other than UBL ... yet another 
reason why, David, one cannot just make arbitrary changes to 
genericode ... it is the result of a lot of work on Tony's part with 
many parties), when this becomes a pure UBL discussion, it should 
probably only happen on UBL-Dev.

>And we should also consider registry storage here - I see you have an
>amount of stuff in the semantics / header department already - that
>looks good - but we should check with Farrukhs dev folks to make sure
>its ebXML registry "ready".  I can do that part next - I'll post
>something to their list tomorrow too.

Sorry, David ... I'm lost in what you say ... I don't have any input 
to the registry storage issue with my methodology.  I don't see how 
it relates.  I'm dealing with standalone validation methodologies.

. . . . . . . . Ken


--
Registration open for XSLT/XSL-FO training: Wash.,DC 2006-06-12/16
Also for XML/XSLT/XSL-FO training:Birmingham,England 2006-05-22/25
Also for XSLT/XSL-FO training:    Copenhagen,Denmark 2006-05-08/11
World-wide on-site corporate, govt. & user group XML/XSL training.
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@C...
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal

• Prev by Date: RE: Concept Oriented Modeling
• Next by Date: Hotel reservation deadline 14 April for XTech 2006; program additions
• Previous by thread: RE: [ubl-dev] Re: Code List Value Validation
• Next by thread: RE: [ubl-dev] Re: Code List Value Validation
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread