[dfdl-wg] DFDL Lite

[Westhead, Martin (Martin)]

One more comment on this Steve suggested that if we were to take this
approach we should drive the definition of the subset from a use-case
analysis based on some specific formats that we'd take a decision to
support.

 

Thanks,

 

Martin

 

 

 

  _____  

From: owner-dfdl-wg at ggf.org [mailto:owner-dfdl-wg at ggf.org] On Behalf Of
Westhead, Martin (Martin)
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 1:55 PM
To: dfdl-wg at ggf.org
Subject: [dfdl-wg] DFDL Lite

 

Hi Folks,

 

Today's discussion really had me wondering about the size of the thing
that we are creating. We are probably looking at a complete spec that is
over 200 pages. I feel reasonably strongly that this is too unwieldy. I
don't think that we have the editorial resource to effectively bug-check
the document and aside from IBM it is difficult to imagine that there
are many groups with the resource to implement it.

 

At the end of today's call we started discussing features of XML Schema
that we might drop from the first release and my attitude to the
discussion was one of resistance. Do we really need to drop attributes?
Doesn't the choices document we have pretty much handle wildcards.

 

We are agreed that the property set should be defined with optional
libraries around a small, but extensible core. I suggested today that we
take the same approach to the whole language. 

 

What if were to focus on defining for our initial release a DFDL Lite
and look for a minimal set of properties and XML Schema mechanisms that
would be useful. Make it as simple and implementable as possible with a
minimal of XML Schema and a minimal set of properties. And define it in
such a way that we can add the rest of the material as modular
supplements (ideally without having to go back and change the existing
semantics).

 

There was reasonable support for this approach from those that remained
on the call today. I wanted to float it to the group...thoughts anyone?

 

Thanks,

 

Martin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20060719/c8497c9d/attachment.htm