[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: Units of Measure
William, Thanks for the clarification. Norman Walsh's statement which you've quoted would seem to me to argue against abstract tags that would point to either an X12 or UN/EDIFACT data element. Additionally, it would also seem to argue against your belief that a code value from one of these two standards be conveyed rather than some human-readable definition. But then, as you've pointed out, look at all of the problems with the variations on how a code definition could be stated. This doesn't seem to point to a clear and easy path for on-the-fly interoperability of XML-based documents, does it? Rachel > > Rachel Foerster asked "Actually, if I understand the XML > Recommendation > correctly, it's only the tag that must be human readable, correct?" > > Dear Rachel: > > One of the requirements in section 1.1 Origin and Goals in the XML 1.0 > Specification, at http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml, does say "XML > documents > should be human-legible and reasonably clear." Norman Walsh adds "If > you don't have an XML browser and you've received a hunk of XML from > somewhere, you ought to be able to look at it in your favorite text > editor and actually figure out what the content means." See XML > Development Goals at http://www.xml.com/pub/98/10/guide1.html. > > I would add that it's reasonable to expect the reader to be > an expert in > the problem domain if they're really going to read the XML document; > probably only somebody intimately familiar with EDI implementation > guidelines, and EDIFACT and X12 terminology, would understand the tags > and structure in igML, say; see http://www.igml.org/. > > Some have advocated nonsense tags (like BZRTVN) whose meaning > would have > to be extracted from some repository, in order to avoid > offending those > whose mother tongue is not English. Unfortunately, those tags would > clearly violate the human-legibility requirement since most > people can't > pronounce anything without vowels. By the way, I'm still waiting for > some clown to advocate neutral star dates because ebXML's ISO > 8601 date > and time requirement uses the Christian calendar. > > I couldn't figure out what John Motley meant by "An X12 message would > simply be another RENDERING with a different DTD." What's > X12 got to do > with a hunk of XML data? And wouldn't you ever need just one DTD? Why > would a DTD have to be rendered at all? It's data that might be > rendered with various style sheets (or programs) to display the same > data with French, Spanish, English, or German labels and legends. Is > John talking about rendering a DTD's element names in a different > language? If so, I can't see the point of that since only programmers > would in all likelihood ever look at XML directly, and they deal with > English labels and commands all day long now in HTML, C++, and Java. > > William J. Kammerer > FORESIGHT Corp. > 4950 Blazer Memorial Pkwy. > Dublin, OH USA 43017-3305 > +1 614 791-1600 > > Visit FORESIGHT Corp. at http://www.foresightcorp.com/ > "Commerce for a New World" > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC