wrote:
>David and Others,
> If the CAM is going to be used to output info as well as
>validate input, A very wide spec I think, but we may well at least think
>big what about the following:
>
> We have Assembly structures that describe how something looks.
>We have rules that describe the effects of context on the input file.
>Why not use the same analogy for output.
>
> We current define an output set of rules but not directly linked
>to a structure. What about defining in the External Mapping section a
>Structure and a set of rules.
>
mm1: Doesn't this have to do more so with the output for presentation or
for processing? If the latter, I believe this is already being addressed
in other groups.
Thanks.
>
> Also this would work well with the mail merge view of the world
>where the input fields could be named, or given ids or aliased and then
>these could be used in the output structure which would reduce the
>rules.
>
> So we could have:
>
> AssembleStructure as:
>
> <Order>
> <Header>
> <OrderDate>$OrderDate</OrderDate>
> <Buyer>$BuyerID</Buyer>
> ...
> </Header>
> <Body>
> ...
> </Body>
> </Order>
>
> Output would be:
>
> <PurchaseOrder>
> <POHeader Date="$OrderDate"/>
> <Party function="Buyer" ID="$BuyerID"/>
> ....
>
> I think you can se my logic.
>
> The restrictions on this are:
>
> 1) Only transformations based on input data are allowed.
> 2) Only one data input is supported (may be need to
>allow referencing of ebXMl and Soap attachments for examples)
> 3) Aliases or XPATHs in to input would be supported.
> 4) Output rules include functions such as substring etc.
>
> I can see this being really powerful.
>
>Martin Roberts
>xml designer,
>BT Exact
>e-mail:
>tel: +44(0) 1473 609785 clickdial
>fax: +44(0) 1473 609834
>Intranet Site :http://twiki.btlabs.bt.co.uk/twiki
>
>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/cam/members/leave_workgroup.php
>
>
>
