RE: [xml-dev] Are people really using Identity constraints specified in XML schema?

["Cox, Bruce" <Bruce.Cox@USPTO.GOV>]

In this context, I think CAM is not appropriate.  Published patent
documents are not dynamic, there are no transactions between just
discovered business partners, so there is no ambiguity of context.  The
content validation mechanism of CAM appears to be mostly a framework for
local customization, which I think would not justify the overhead of CAM
for this purpose. 


Bruce B. Cox
SA4XMLT
+1-703-306-2606

-----Original Message-----
From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:len.bullard@intergraph.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 10:03 AM
To: 'bry@itnisk.com'; Cox, Bruce
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Are people really using Identity constraints
specified in XML schema?

CAM can be one useful technology.  Again, the assessment of the
situation/context is the important issue and one asks if there are
high-level patterns that can be discerned here.

One aside:  reading the CAM page, yet again someone says XML is not
meant to describe X and then uses XML to create 
an XML application to describe X.   There is a certain 
silliness in pages that do that, but it is the downstream ha ha from a
community that sold XML as a one size fits all solution for
interoperation when all it is is a one size fits all syntax for
portability.

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/5930/CAM%20Executive%2
0Ove
rview%20brochure%2003Mar04.pdf

"However XML by itself is only a markup language, it was never intended
to support exacting business interchange definitions, rules and industry
vocabularies."

It was intended to support whatever you want to support.

"CAM provides a rich yet simple context
mechanism defined in XML syntax that.."

As we may think...

len


From: bry@itnisk.com [mailto:bry@itnisk.com]

wow, this sounds like CAM
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=cam