Re: English Language Tags

[Sandy Klausner <klausner@coretalk.net>]

Title: Re: English Language Tags

John:
I really can't spare the energy to discuss this subject in more detail. My concluding remark below speaks to the need for an integrated approach to the many issues being addressed by ebXML. This is only to say that I feel that CoreTalk's opinion on the tag issue will be taken out of context if I continue down this particular discussion at this time.
Sandy

> From: David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:16:54 -0500
> To: John McClure <hypergrove@olympus.net>
> Cc: "Ebxml-Core@Lists. Ebxml. Org" <ebxml-core@lists.ebxml.org>, Sandy 
> Klausner <klausner@coretalk.net>
> Subject: RE: English Language Tags
> 
> Message text written by John McClure
>> 
> JM2: Well, if it's not there, then create it! It's not that hard you
> know! The point is to stay on the same field as the rest of the world -- I
> don't see a huge effort in the W3C to create a registry of data element
> UIDs
> for their OWN elements because XML Namespaces and XML Schemas are adequate.
> <<<<<<<<<<<
> 
> Hell will freeze over first - this is out-of-scope for the W3C schema work 
> and the W3C.
> 
> That's the whole rational for ebXML - to show how fielded XML works
> for business transactions...
> 
> DW.
> 
> JM: The mechanisms envisioned by XML Namespaces (W3C Technical Recommendation #2) and XML Schema certainly seem adequate -- perhaps not perfectly, but certainly "good enough" -- what's broken about it that UIDs would solve?
SK: This ebXML challenge remains to bolt all these technologies together. UIDs are just one small aspect of a much greater problem. The winning solution needs to integrate many ideas together. So this is not so much an issue of what specific problems would UIDs solve.