← Prev in month ← Prev in thread
Next in thread → Next in month →

Groups - HAVE 2.1.6 (Service Type changes) uploaded

From
Darrell O'Donnell
Date
2012-05-08T18:57:00+00:00
ID
Thread
Groups - HAVE 2.1.6 (Service Type changes) uploaded
Submitter's message
for discussion at today's EM HAVE SC meeting.

 The big change here is with ServicesType. I have attempted to create a way to support HAVE 1.0/HAVBED services listing while creating an extensible version as well. This effort is by no means complete. I need someone a bit more XML savvy on this one to assist.

 I would like to create an example of the ServiceListItem that I created which has all of the HAVE/HAvBED services listed to show how the ExtensibleServicesList would work - that could negate the need for the HAVE1Services element totally.

 STYLE QUESTIONS:
 ATTRIBUTE vs. ELEMENT - I used some attributes and I am guessing that generally speaking HAVE should use elements - is this a formal decision or has it just evolved?

 ID and IDREF - I haven't noticed any usage of ID/IDREF datatypes. Is this a general approach - I know that some groups don't much like them?

--
Darrell O'Donnell
Document Name :  HAVE 2.1.6 (Service Type changes)

Description
for discussion at today's EM HAVE SC meeting.

 The big change here is with ServicesType. I have attempted to create a way  to support HAVE 1.0/HAVBED services listing while creating an extensible  version as well. This effort is by no means complete. I need someone a bit  more XML savvy on this one to assist.

 I would like to create an example of the ServiceListItem that I created  which has all of the HAVE/HAvBED services listed to show how the  ExtensibleServicesList would work - that could negate the need for the  HAVE1Services element totally.

 STYLE QUESTIONS:
 ATTRIBUTE vs. ELEMENT - I used some attributes and I am guessing that  generally speaking HAVE should use elements - is this a formal decision or  has it just evolved?

 ID and IDREF - I haven't noticed any usage of ID/IDREF datatypes. Is this a  general approach - I know that some groups don't much like them?
Download Latest Revision
Public Download Link
Submitter : Darrell O'Donnell
Group : EM HAVE SC
Folder : Standards
Date submitted : 2012-05-08 11:56:50
← Prev in month ← Prev in thread
Next in thread → Next in month →