[wg11] Part 28: Incompatible revision of the MAP directive

[David Price]

Heidi,

I don't think this affects the PLCS community at all since we don't expect
implementers of data exchange translators to use a Part 28 post-processor at
all, only XML schema-aware software.

Cheers,
David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wg11-bounces at steptools.com [mailto:wg11-bounces at steptools.com] On
> Behalf Of Heidi L Preston
> Sent: 11 August 2004 22:28
> To: xmlsc4 at nist.gov; wg11 at steptools.com
> Subject: [wg11] Part 28: Incompatible revision of the MAP directive
> 
> 
> 
> In response to several ballot comments, the Part 28 editing meeting has
> decided that no post processor will be required to accept an arbitrary
> configuration file, and process XML data according to the resulting XML
> schema.  Rather, the configuration language will be used to formally
> define
> the derivation of particular (perhaps normative) XML schemas from the
> corresponding EXPRESS schemas.  Germany has requested a more powerful MAP
> configuration directive to specify the mapping of an arbitrary EXPRESS
> defined data type to an arbitrary XML schema data type, e.g.,
> "julian_date"
> to "xsd:dateTime" or "address" to CEFACT "Address".  The editing meeting
> proposes to accept this comment, and to change the current MAP directive
> to
> support it.
> 
> This change in effect makes it IMPOSSIBLE to build a post processor that
> can accept an arbitrary configuration file, and process XML data according
> to the resulting XML schema.  In general, the post processor would need
> specific knowledge of how to perform any/all such MAPped transforms.
> 
> This is not a problem for post processors for specific derived XML
> schemas,
> e.g., the proposed AP214 XML schemas, or the probably AP238 and AP239 XML
> schemas.  Those post processors will understand the interpretation of the
> (perhaps normative) XML schema.
> 
> It is also not a problem for schema generator tools, in that generating
> the
> MAPped XML schema only does not require knowledge of how to perform the
> data transforms.
> 
> We recognize that this situation will be incompatible with the previous
> requirements of the draft.  Does anyone have a problem with this
> generalization of the MAP directive?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> **************************************************************************
> *
> Heidi Preston
> Electric Boat Corporation
> 75 Eastern Point Road
> Groton, CT 06340
> (860) 433-8649
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wg11 mailing list
> wg11 at steptools.com
> http://lists.steptools.com/mailman/listinfo/wg11