OpenCSA Liaison Subcommittee

RAISER:  Mike Edwards, on behalf
of the SCA BPEL TC

TARGET: All Specifications which define
XML structures via XSD

DESCRIPTION:

An issue was raised in the BPEL TC which
proposes the use of Schematron for expressing constraints which cannot
be captured using vanilla XSD.  It
is true that SCA specifications quite generally have constraints of this
kind.

The question for the liaison committee
is: should Schematron get adopted by all of the SCA specifications for
expressing constraints on XML structures?
  It would seem preferable for this to be all-or-nothing for the SCA
specs
as a whole - either they all use Schematron
or none of them should, for consistency sake.



Here is the original Issue as raised
to the BPEL TC:

--------------------------------
DESCRIPTION: There are several places in the document
where we make

statements limiting the usage of our defined XML items.  An example
from

Section 3.3, where sca-bpel:service and sca-bpel:reference are defined:

"A process MUST NOT include both attributes on a single partnerLink."
 

This kind of restriction can not be encoded in XML Schema intuitively,

so we don't.  Furthermore, there is an implicit restriction that these

attributes are only to be used on a partnerLink, but again, we don't

state that formally.


PROPOSAL: Define SchemaTron rules in our specification that formalize

the constraints that are now limited to either informal verbal

constraints, or implied constraints.
---------------------------------


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:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com        










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

Currently the offcial formalism is the appropriate use of 
RFC2119, so nothing should be informal, verbal or implied! 
I don't see a problem 
using schematron in addition to good spec text, but the spec text has to be the 
focus.
Martin.

  

  


                                                

					
                                                    

        
                                                
				
                                                

                                                    
                                                        
                                                        Original Message
                                                
                                                Original Message-----
From: Mike Edwards 
  [mailto:mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 
  11:34 AM
To: OASIS Liaison
Subject: [opencsa-liaison] NEW 
  ISSUE: Use of Schematron in SCA Specifications


RAISER:  Mike Edwards, on behalf of the SCA BPEL 
  TC

TARGET: All Specifications 
  which define XML structures via XSD

DESCRIPTION:

An issue was 
  raised in the BPEL TC which proposes the use of Schematron for expressing 
  constraints which cannot
be captured 
  using vanilla XSD.  It is true that SCA specifications quite generally 
  have constraints of this kind.

The 
  question for the liaison committee is: should Schematron get adopted by all of 
  the SCA specifications for
expressing 
  constraints on XML structures?   It would seem preferable for this to be 
  all-or-nothing for the SCA specs
as a 
  whole - either they all use Schematron or none of them should, for consistency 
  sake.



Here is the original 
  Issue as raised to the BPEL TC:

--------------------------------
DESCRIPTION: There are several places in the document where we make
statements limiting the usage of our defined XML items.  An example 
  from
Section 3.3, where sca-bpel:service and sca-bpel:reference are 
  defined:
"A process MUST NOT include both attributes on a single 
  partnerLink."  
This kind of restriction can not be encoded in XML 
  Schema intuitively,
so we don't.  Furthermore, there is an implicit 
  restriction that these
attributes are only to be used on a partnerLink, 
  but again, we don't
state that formally.

PROPOSAL: Define 
  SchemaTron rules in our specification that formalize
the constraints that 
  are now limited to either informal verbal
constraints, or implied 
  constraints.
---------------------------------

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: 
   mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com        



  

  


  
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 
  

I should mention that RelaxNG was also mentioned in this context.

-Anish
--

Mike Edwards wrote:
> 
> RAISER:  Mike Edwards, on behalf of the SCA BPEL TC
> 
> TARGET: All Specifications which define XML structures via XSD
> 
> DESCRIPTION:
> 
> An issue was raised in the BPEL TC which proposes the use of Schematron 
> for expressing constraints which cannot
> be captured using vanilla XSD.  It is true that SCA specifications quite 
> generally have constraints of this kind.
> 
> The question for the liaison committee is: should Schematron get adopted 
> by all of the SCA specifications for
> expressing constraints on XML structures?   It would seem preferable for 
> this to be all-or-nothing for the SCA specs
> as a whole - either they all use Schematron or none of them should, for 
> consistency sake.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the original Issue as raised to the BPEL TC:
> 
> --------------------------------
> DESCRIPTION: There are several places in the document where we make
> statements limiting the usage of our defined XML items.  An example from
> Section 3.3, where sca-bpel:service and sca-bpel:reference are defined:
> "A process MUST NOT include both attributes on a single partnerLink."  
> This kind of restriction can not be encoded in XML Schema intuitively,
> so we don't.  Furthermore, there is an implicit restriction that these
> attributes are only to be used on a partnerLink, but again, we don't
> state that formally.
> 
> PROPOSAL: Define SchemaTron rules in our specification that formalize
> the constraints that are now limited to either informal verbal
> constraints, or implied constraints.
> ---------------------------------
> 
> 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:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com        
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> /
> /
> 
> /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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>