Re: revised 0.94 sample CPA, CPP, XSD and DTD

[christopher ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>]

Oops! Good catch, I thought that I had updated these to reflect
the outcome of the Vancouver discussion, but I guess not!

I actually prefer the lower case (which is where I was going
in earlier drafts) but cut-n-pasted from your input.

I will make a quick revision to reflect the following in the
xsd:
	lower case for all values
	valid values:
		responseOnly
		signalsOnly
		signalsAndResponse
		none

We should revise the spec text accordingly (attached).

Cheers,

Chris


Prasad Yendluri wrote:
> 
> Chris,
> 
> The cpp-cpa-094.xsd schema that you posted shows the SyncReplyMode to take different values than
> the one that was in word document that Marty sent this morning. Which has the latest? Looks like
> this change reflects Tony Weida's concerns but, I think it is good to have the "Only" part to
> indicate the requirement explicitly (e.g. SignalsOnly):
> 
>         xsd:attribute name="syncReplyMode">
>                 <xsd:simpleType>
>                         <xsd:restriction base="xsd:NMTOKEN">
>                                 <xsd:enumeration value="responseOnly"/>
>                                 <xsd:enumeration value="batch"/>
>                                 <xsd:enumeration value="signalsOnly"/>
>                                 <xsd:enumeration value="none"/>
>                         </xsd:restriction>
>                 </xsd:simpleType>
>         </xsd:attribute>
> 
> BTW, what are the semantics on "batch" now?
> 
> Thanks, Prasad
> 
> christopher ferris wrote:
> 
> > All,
> >
> > Attached you will find references to the revised sample
> > CPP, CPA documents as well as the XSD for the CPP/CPA
> > schema. I'm still working on the DTD. Hopefully, I'll
> > have it finished later today... more tool difficulty;-)
> >
> > Interestingly enough, with one minor exception, everything
> > validates. The exception is that XMLSpy doesn't agree
> > with reality that "http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" is
> > a valid xsd:uriReference, which of course, it is!
> >
> > Anyway, I have posted these artifacts at:
> >
> >         http://ebxml.org/project_teams/trade_partner/cpp-cpa-094.xsd
> >         http://ebxml.org/project_teams/trade_partner/cpp-example.xml
> >         http://ebxml.org/project_teams/trade_partner/cpa-example.xml
> >
> > I have also posted revised schema for xmldsig (removing the ENTITY
> > declaration for &dsig which was giving XMLSpy some difficulty
> > (a bug in the XMLSpy software). I have also posted an experimental
> > schema for XLink as well.
> >
> > Since I didn't have the ftp password for the TP site at the time,
> > these have been posted to the transport website:
> >
> >         http://ebxml.org/project_teams/transport/xlink.xsd
> >         http://ebxml.org/project_teams/transport/xmldsig-core-schema.xsd
> >
> > The schemaLocation entries in the various documents posted reflect
> > these alternate schema as opposed to the normative location
> > (at least for XMLDSig which has a normative schema).
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Chris

Characteristics_element.doc