Title: RE: [ubl-ndrsc] more input
Exactly. In talking to the various XML Schema Working Group members, I think this was one of the fundamental flaws in its approach and organization. In something as tricky as schema design, it is difficult (impossible) to make a solution that satisfies needs 100%; Thus, when there are different approaches--both satisfying potential use cases--there needs to be some sort of prioritization. In XML Schema, since there was very little rationalization of use cases, the decisions ended up being very inconsistent, and in the end it turned out a frankenstein-ian design that I've never heard anyone like.
Kelly
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Rawlins [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 3:32 PM
To: UBL Design Rules (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [ubl-ndrsc] more input
"Schwarzhoff, Kelly" wrote :
> I agree, it is "key for whom". That's why I'm wondering what the use
> cases are, and the prioritization of those use cases.
We talked through a lot of different user profiles (and corresponding
use cases) in the planning committee, and that is how we came up with
the ubiquitous "various and sundry". What we *didn't* do was assign
priorities. Hello, Eve? Is this something we want to take on ask a
task? I think that is what Kelly is concerned about...
--
Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
www.rawlinsecconsulting.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
