Question to AP owners/implementors on XML Schema use (Part 28 Edition 2)

[Ricardo Goncalves]

Dear David,
 
  The AP236 pilot demonstrator based on Part28e2 now in preparation,
reflects most of your issues, special 3, 4 and 5.
 
  Regards
 
   Ricardo

-----Original Message-----
From: David Price [mailto:david.price at eurostep.com] 
Sent: terca-feira, 2 de Dezembro de 2003 16:39
To: wg3 at tc184-sc4.org; wg12 at tc184-sc4.org
Cc: expressIF at tc184-sc4.org; step-imp at steptools.com
Subject: Question to AP owners/implementors on XML Schema use (Part 28
Edition 2)



Hello WG3 and WG12,

 

We've been working with the AP233 and AP239 teams on Part 28 Edition 2
and XML Schema. Part 28 E2 introduces a configuration language allowing
the production of an XML schema to be tailored for an EXPRESS schema.
The tailoring can happen at the global, entity and/or attribute level.
The issue that has been raised during the discussions with AP233 and
AP239 is if, or how, this capability should be used.

 

I'm trying to gather "business requirements" and "technical
requirements" in this area. If you have requirements or usage scenarios
in this area, I'd appreciate hearing about them.

 

So far, what I've heard from these two teams (and relayed to the Part 28
team today) is the following:

 

1) A single configuration to produce a "default data exchange XML
Schema" for both (or all?) APs is required. Some have said they want
WG3/SC4 to agree and mandate a single configuration for AP
implementation.

2) Exactly what the XML document looks like is not that important as a
high level, model based API will be used.

3) The XML schema elements should be "recognizable" as being derived
from the EXPRESS schema, but trying to reflect the EXPRESS structure in
XML is less important than simplicity and consistency.

4) Interoperability, and therefore the same configuration, is a high
priority for AP233, AP239 and PDM capabilities.

5) The first AP233 and AP239 implementations will be based on the ARM,
not the AIM. This may continue to be true for all implementations as
well.

6) The PLCS consortium is planning on publishing the AP239 ARM XML
Schema through OASIS, so they don't expect implementations to be
EXPRESS-based.

 

Do other AP teams share these requirements? I agree they are not all
completely consistent (ARM v. AIM), but requirements seldom are. If your
requirements are different, in what way?

 

Cheers,

David

 

Phone +44 20 7704 0499

Mobile +44 7788 561308

8 Highbury Place, Flat 5

London N5 1QZ

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.steptools.com/pipermail/step-imp/attachments/20031202/e095f533/attachment.html