Final technical agreement sought for EXPRESS 2

[David Price]

Hi Phil,

What a strange (over)reaction, I didn't actually say the words you put
in my mouth. 

As far as what concerns implementors, don't shoot the messenger. I'm
only quoting what I heard at the CAx- and PDM-IFs from some of the
coders. Many only want a long form, sample Part 21 files, a usage guide
and an AP expert to phone with questions. Many don't really read the
AP/module or worry what the rules in the schema mean as they address so
few of the topic-area rules they have to worry about. That said, I'm not
suggesting we ignore trying to do the right thing. Just that in these
two cases, I support not doing anything now.

I guess I could also have explained that the reason I think implementors
don't worry much about use/reference and visibility is that EXPRESS
seems flawed in this area. Visibility, namespace and partitioning are
mixed up in one construct. 

On the other hand, people love derived and inverse attributes, so.... go
enjoy your holiday!

Cheers,
David

Eurostep Limited
8 Highbury Place - Flat 5
London N5 1QZ
Phone 020 7704 0499
Fax 020 7704 6249
Mobile 07788 561 308


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-wg11 at steptools.com 
> [mailto:owner-wg11 at steptools.com] On Behalf Of Phil Spiby
> Sent: 17 April 2003 15:41
> To: 'David Price'; wg11 at steptools.com
> Subject: RE: Final technical agreement sought for EXPRESS 2
> 
> 
> David,
> 
> I have a problem with the approach of "lets not bother with 
> this because the current implementations don't handle it". If 
> we are adopting this approach then perhaps we shouldn't map 
> constants and global rules. And if the target is P21 
> implementation then we don't need to map derived attributes 
> or inverse attributes either since these are ignored in P21 
> implementations.
> 
> With regard to comments I don't have a problem with this, 
> since it at least forces the implementers to read the couple 
> of hundred modules documents before they start implementing!
> 
> Phil
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-wg11 at steptools.com
> > [mailto:owner-wg11 at steptools.com] On Behalf Of David Price
> > Sent: 17 April 2003 15:22
> > To: wg11 at steptools.com
> > Subject: RE: Final technical agreement sought for EXPRESS 2
> > 
> > 
> > I support not mapping use/reference visibility restrictions
> > into global rules. I don't think implementors are worried 
> > about this and the long form is really for implementors.
> > 
> > I support not mapping any comments at all as mapping some
> > will lead to confusion.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > David
> > 
> > Eurostep Limited
> > 8 Highbury Place - Flat 5
> > London N5 1QZ
> > Phone 020 7704 0499
> > Fax 020 7704 6249
> > Mobile 07788 561 308
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-wg11 at steptools.com 
> [mailto:owner-wg11 at steptools.com] On 
> > > Behalf Of Phil Spiby
> > > Sent: 17 April 2003 14:46
> > > To: wg11 at steptools.com
> > > Subject: Final technical agreement sought for EXPRESS 2
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Folks,
> > > 
> > > There are two technical issues on the short to long form 
> generator 
> > > that, as far as I can, see there was no recorded
> > agreement.
> > > 
> > > 1. Distinction of first and second class entities in the 
> longform. 
> > > This was proposed and there were discussions around how 
> to form the 
> > > required global rule(s). This is not currently in the 
> draft, but I 
> > > haven't seen where the agreement to pull it from the draft was 
> > > taken. I would prefer to see this in the document, but if 
> there has 
> > > been agreement to remove it, or if there is no agreement 
> on how to 
> > > do it available in the next week, then I suggest we leave 
> things as
> > > they are. Although I feel this is another opportunity to do 
> > > things correctly which has gone begging!
> > > 
> > > 2. Mapping of comments.
> > > This has also been discussed and Peter pointed out that 
> since there 
> > > was no association of comments it was impossible. However, the 
> > > tagged comment capability provides an association, which could be 
> > > mapped through. I suggest we map through tagged comments, and all 
> > > other comments are dropped (as done at present).
> > > 
> > > Phil
> > > 
> > >  -----------------------------------------------------------
> > > Dr. Phil Spiby               Tel: +44 1623 522940
> > > Eurostep Limited             Fax: +44 1623 522940
> > > 73 Columbia Avenue           Mobile: +44 7785 990352
> > > Sutton-in-Ashfield           Email:Phil.Spiby at Eurostep.com
> > > Nottinghamshire
> > > NG17 2GZ
> > > United Kingdom
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
>