Discussion Topics Re-Revisited

["Petit, John" <jpetit@kpmg.com>]

*****************************************************************************
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else
is unauthorized. 

If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution
or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited
and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice
contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in
the governing KPMG client engagement letter.         
*****************************************************************************

 1) We had a discussion today (again) about what constitutes an ebXML repository. I hope that the attached illustration helps in our understanding of the issue. This is my understanding of how ebXML metadata is differentiated from other document objects.

 Go on…rip it apart.

 

 2) Unique IDs.  There was also a great deal of talk today about what unique IDs would be used for and how they would be applied. It seems that the consensus was that unique IDs would be applied at the schema level, not the document level. This means that two XML documents which are from the same schema would have unique IDs for a specific tag, but not each content instance. As shown below, the IDs are unique for the tag <FRUIT> but the same in each document instance. (Be gentle now, these documents are only here to illustrate a point, not be full ebXML doc examples!)

Document 1

<FOOD id=559849JUE98>

            <FRUIT id=39408JEX98> apple</FRUIT>

</FOOD>

 

Document 2 

<FOOD id=559849JUE98>

            <FRUIT id=39408JEX98> orange</FRUIT>

</FOOD>

 

Cheers, John Petit
KPMG
XMLfs Team
Office: 970 728 9468
Mobile: 312 961 8956

 

Namespace illustration.zip