Re: [sca-assembly] NEW ISSUE: Do we need appendix A (pseudo-schema)?

Folks,

I agree with Anish's point here - pseudo-schema
snippets in the main text of the specification are an aid

to understanding of the formal XSD -
but they are not a replacement for the XSD itself.  So the concept
of

an appendix gathering full pseudo-schemas
seems nonsensical to me.

The original OSOA Assembly spec did
not have this pseudo-schema appendix, so it crept in at one of the

OASIS drafts - who put it there and
what was the reasoning?

I am in favour of removing the pseudo-schema
appendix.

Yours,  Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.

Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.

IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.

Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014    Mobile: +44-7802-467431  

Email:  

Anish Karmarkar <>

04/07/2008 00:58

To

OASIS Assembly <>

cc

Subject

Re: [sca-assembly] NEW ISSUE: Do we
need appendix A (pseudo-schema)?

I should also note that none of the other SCA specs
(eg: SCA BPEL) have 

a pseudo-schema appendix. It would be nice to be consistent.

-Anish

--

Anish Karmarkar wrote:

> Title: Do we need appendix A (pseudo-schema)?

> 

> Description:

> In the assembly spec, statements related to the structure of the 

> scdl/componentType/constrainingType occur in:

> 1) Spec text (such as, 'this optional element of type xs:anyURI washes

> dishes'),

> 2) XML Schema in appendix B

> 3) XML Schema as a separate doc pointed at by the RDDL

> 4) pseudo-schema that is strewn throughout the spec

> 5) pseudo-schema in appendix A

> 

> Any change to the syntax requires changes in 5 different places. Yes,

> pseudo-schemas are non-normative, so an error in pseudo-schema poses
a 

> lesser problem than an error in normative text. Nevertheless, we should

> aim for no errors. Pseudo-schema is meant mostly for readability (as
in 

> most cases XML Schema isn't) and therefore meant for consumption by

> human readers. We already have partial pseudo-schemas throughout the

> doc. Is it still necessary to have a consolidated pseudo-schema in

> appendix A? If not, we should get rid of it and eliminate a potential

> source of inconsistency/error.

> 

> Proposal: none

> 

> -Anish

> -- 

> 

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your
TCs in 

> OASIS

> at:

> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
in OASIS

at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

Unless stated otherwise above:

IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598. 

Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU