ebxml-regrep message

OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

Subject: Re: Important for POC Registry Implementors: Bug FixesinRegistryServices v0.8


I trimmed down the replyto since this is a RR and POC issue.

You misunderstood my proposal. I  was talking about classes in the information
model UML diagram and not XML schemas or DTDs. Note that the attributes in the
UML model map to attributes in the DTD for RS. There are no "."s in element
names or attribute names in the DTDs nor will there be in the future.

Hope that addresses your concern.

Sam Hunting wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@east.sun.com>
> To: "Sam Hunting" <shunting@ecomxml.com>
> Cc: "David RR Webber" <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>; "Farrukh Najmi"
> <Farrukh.Najmi@east.sun.com>; "ebXML poc" <ebxml-poc@lists.ebxml.org>;
> "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>; "ebxml repository"
> <ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org>
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 8:23 AM
> Subject: Re: Important for POC Registry Implementors: Bug Fixes
> inRegistryServices v0.8
> > OK. I get the hint. We will retain ebXMLError. I assume the
> > Attribute.type=>Attribute.attributeType change is acceptable unless I hear
> > otherwise.
> Well, since you bring it up...
> Maybe I've missed a thread, since I am so new, but in general I distrust
> dot-style naming in tags unless such naming supports a formalism that is
> documented.
> If the dots are there because they feel "comfortable" to a procedural
> programmer, then that worries me, because the "notation" suggests a
> formalism that is in fact not present, and may not be present consistently
> across the ebXML family of DTDs.  In that case, why not camelcase such tag
> names to "AttributeAttributeType"?  Another alternative is to use dashes or
> underscores for "word separators" since they do not have the formalist
> connotations that dot-style notation does.
> Alternatively, if a formalism is present, there may be other ways to express
> it...
> I realize this is a controversial matter; I am not, repeat not, trying to
> start a flame war, just to share some lessons from my own practice.
> Thanks...
> Sam Hunting
> XML Evangelist


org:Sun Microsystems;Java Software
adr:;;1 Network Drive, MS BUR02-302;Burlington;MA;01803-0902;USA
fn:Farrukh S. Najmi

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

Powered by eList eXpress LLC