Issue 18302: XML type description not orthogonal and not consistent (issues)
Source: PrismTech (Mr. Erik Hendriks, erik.hendriks(at)prismtech.com)
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Significant
Summary: The XML description of a type seems cumbersome and not orthogonal. I have lots of questions regarding it. Why do we propose 2 separate XML representations (Valid and Well-formed) that both have obvious flaws instead of 1 XML representation that satisfies the requirements of both representations? PrismTech has written an extensive proposal on how represent the types in XML that is both valid, well-formed and orthogonal. I would propose to give that proposal a thought. (Can't attach the document to this ticket, but I will gladly make it available. Angelo also has access to that document
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
December 12, 2012: received issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org
Date: 12 Dec 2012 08:13:12 -0500
To: <issues@omg.org>
Subject: Issue/Bug Report
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==


*******************************************************************************
Name:            Erik Hendriks
Employer:        PrismTech
mailFrom:        erik.hendriks@prismtech,com
Terms_Agreement: I agree
Specification:   Extensible and Dynamic Topic Types for DDS
Section:         7.4.2
FormalNumber:    ptc/2012-03-26
Version:         1.0
Doc_Year:        2012
Doc_Month:       February
Doc_Day:         Day
Page:            105
Title:           XML type description not orthogonal and not consistent
Nature:          Clarification
Severity:        Significant
CODE:            3TMw8
B1:              Report Issue


Description:


The XML description of a type seems cumbersome and not orthogonal. I have lots of questions regarding it. Why do we propose 2 separate XML representations (Valid and Well-formed) that both have obvious flaws instead of 1 XML representation that satisfies the requirements of both representations? PrismTech has written an extensive proposal on how represent the types in XML that is both valid, well-formed and orthogonal. I would propose to give that proposal a thought. (Can't attach the document to this ticket, but I will gladly make it available. Angelo also has access to that document.