UBL Naming and Design Rules SC

 View Only

Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Rule: 96 Two Schema

  • 1.  Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Rule: 96 Two Schema

    Posted 07-21-2003 04:36
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Anthony B. Coates wrote:
    
    >>** Reply to message from Chin Chee-Kai <cheekai@softml.net> on Wed, 16 Jul 2003
    >>10:08:16 +0800 (SGT)
    >>
    >>...
    >>Although I understand the orthodoxy behind only wanting a single normative
    >>version of any deliverable, I strongly support UBL providing the two flavours
    >>of Schema.
    
    So I suppose we don't differ so much here.  Is it right
    to say that your point being:  Provide the undocumented
    version to help others, but ok with having only one 
    normative form (say, the documented one)?
    
    I'm certainly not against (not that I have any influence
    in the final decision) supplying multiple forms
    within what TC members can provide.  We're doing that
    already anyway with supplying spreadsheets-equivalent,
    UML-equivalent diagrams, etc.
    
    
    
    
    Best Regards,
    Chin Chee-Kai
    SoftML
    Tel: +65-6820-2979
    Fax: +65-6743-7875
    Email: cheekai@SoftML.Net
    http://SoftML.Net/