Re: Announcement from Technical Architecture

[David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Message text written by KETELS Kris
> 
I fully concur both with Scott and Cory.

Although there can be needs to 'reverse engineer' DTD's into UML (e.g.
legacy, or what Scott mentioned), never forget DTD lack the
richness of UML to represent formally a business standard So this process
can never be bijective. I don't think it is EbXML's goal
(at least not in a first phase) to provide design rules to convert DTD into
UML.

<<<<<<<<<<<<

Kris,

Maybe I'm looking through the binoculars the other way around?!

I'd like to think UML import filters can read plain vanilla DTD's as a base
set
and default all the modelling stuff to 'not now, later', which is I
understand
what UML is currently capable of doing (as previously asserted by Charles
if
I recall correctly).

Notice that the responsiblity lies with UML, the modelling tool, to be able
to interact with data repository formats, and thus ebXML need not
trouble itself with the vaguries of UML syntax.  This is as it should be
IMHO.

Thanks, DW.