ubl — archive

Re: [ubl] Fw: [ubl-ssc] schema comparison for final build

From: Anne Hendry
To: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 08:34:00 -0000

 MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

ubl message

[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [ubl] Fw: [ubl-ssc] schema comparison for final build

From: Anne Hendry <[email protected]>
To: Stephen Green <[email protected]>,       [email protected]
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 01:42:17 -0700

Thanks, Stephen, for all your work validating these final versions (and 
all your prior efforts leading up to this as well!).

The SSC can now report that validation has occurred on both the new UDT 
schemas and further testing was performed on the new schema set 
delivered by David, as well as on the old schema set with David's new 
UDT schemas replacing the old UDT schema.  The attached schema report 
includes line-by-line diffs on the old and new UDT schemas.  This should 
enable anyone in NDR to confirm that the changes to this schema meet the 
expectations of the last discussions in Copenhagen on the conformance to 
CDT9 and CDT10.

The SSC finds the latest schemas to be ready for release.
However, the changes discussed above have created a need for 
regeneration of the ASN.1 schemas.
Paul Thorpe has agreed to one more ASN.1 run, and will contact Jon 
directly to coordinate this.

It's the view of the SSC that no more changes to the existing schemas 
are necessary - that these schemas have been adequately verified based 
on the testing done on the 17 August versions and this week's 
verification of the package with the new udt schemas.  We recommend to 
the TC that these be released as the final CD to OASIS.

It would be very useful if everyone who can would continue testing, as 
anything we find can then be put on the 1.1 list.

Thanks very much.  Hopefully by this time next week we'll be thinking 
about 1.1!

- Anne, Stephen, and SSC participants

Stephen Green wrote:

> Thanks Anne for testing the new UDT Schemas (sent by David
> on 2004-08-24 as an update to those in the set of Schemas sent
> on 2004-08-17). Anne checked that no other differences existed
> when compared with the earlier ones - using a text comparison tool.
> Anne confirmed that the results showed no differences other than those
> required (i.e. simpleTypes rather than complexTypes for certain UDTs).
>
> I too can confirm that substituting these 2004-08-24 UDT Schemas
> (xsd and xsdrt versions) for the UDT Schemas in the earlier 2004-08-17 set
>still
> resulted in 100% validation (with XML Spy 2004) of all the document
> test instances I sent out earlier. This is one test of XSD compliance and
> compares with similar results of validation with various validators
>performed
> on the earlier 2004-08-17 Schemas.
>
> These 2004-08-24 UDT Schemas therefore seem reliable and valid by XSD
> and NDR requirements, and more so compared with the 2004-08-17 Schemas
> thoroughly reviewed and tested during the Copenhagen plenaries.
> They have further compliance to the NDR rules (and design intentions) in
> their use of simpleTypes, compared with the 2004-08-17 UDT Schemas.
>
> Hopefully Jon can now add these UDT Schemas to those in the existing
> package, pending any further validation, etc in the meantime.
>
> All the best
>
> Stephen Green
>
>
>PS
>The way these UDT Schemas were attached before made them possibly lose some
>formatting when saved from the e-mail so I've wrapped them in a zip file
>(extension
>changed to .zzz for mailserver reasons) and attached them here again.
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>>