Re: Tag Languages, UID's etc.

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

Message text written by Murray Maloney
> 
At 03:39 PM 1/28/01 -0500, William J. Kammerer wrote:
>Even
>if political correctness dictated that the BSR Semantic Components be
>expressed in French, they would still be useful and somewhat
>decipherable to English-speaking programmers who had to sully their
>hands with XML. Unlike UCC/EAN UPCs, our vocabulary doesn't really have
>to be simplified (by conversion to numeric IDs) to the point where it
>can be bar-coded and scanned.

Or to put it another way -- better to use tag names that at least
one segment of the population has a hope of understanding than
to use tag names that no person has a hope of understanding.
        -- paraphrasing Jon Bosak with whom I agree on this subject
<<<<<<<<<<<

Murray,

I recall all those conversations.  I resolved all this so that the schema
MLS works effectively too.  Therefore there is NO restriction on you using
complex component references (aka real names) if you so desire,
and definately for certain classes of non-legacy situations this works
well.  For legacy EDI, the codes already exist.

Of course the computer sees no difference - these are all just 
alphanumeric string sequences.

Anyway - this was all fully spelled out in the original TA drafts and
Registry drafts, and since removed from current drafts - which is 
why - yet again we're burning clock-cycles explaining this all over.

Suggest we get a definative resolution to this in Vancouver from
the already well documented work - not just from myself - but
also several others as well in this whole area.

Thanks, DW.