Subject: Re: Party XML Schema Defintions
Martin Bryan wrote: > What alternative do you propose that offers the same > functionality (and please don't use a four letter word beginning with J). >>>> Martin: Sorry - I may not have been clear with my comment. I was not advocating banning of XSLT, I felt it was not proper to mandate its' use. I am sure, as you pointed out, that many SME and SME intergrators will build web based systems using browsers and XML+XSL(T). Lost cost to SMEs' has to be of paramount importance. It may be as simple as an SME using a web page to find LargeCo's CPP, hitting a hyperlink or two to retrieve their BPD and then subsequently building an HTML form based on an XML file (possibly using XSLT) to fill out an invoice or PO. XSLT has many advantages however, it is not the only transformation technology. Many vendors have XSLT type funtionality in their products. We also have to possibly include SQL, CSV, EDI and CGI to XML transformations. This goes beyond XML -> XML which means that scoping XSLT as the official methodology may not work for all businesses. YOu make some great comments about SME's. I feel, as you do, that it is important for us all to keep them in mind as ebXML moves forward. Cheers Duane
Powered by
eList eXpress LLC