Monica,

Good summary.

Minor nit - I think this wording is clearer -

Old o Should an implementer desire to resolve to other than the latest schema, a specific schema should be requested. New o Should an implementer desire to resolve to other than the latest schema, that specific schema can be directly referenced. Thanks, DW

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ebxml-bp] Schema file names ATTENTION 28 March 2006 From: Monica J Martin <Moni...@Sun.COM> Date: Tue, March 28, 2006 11:18 am To: Stephen Green <step...@gmail.com>, ebxm...@lists.oasis-open.org

As a (albeit late, sorry) followup to Stephen's questions that we discussed 14 March 2006, here is a summary of the discussion from that meeting and one additional comment driven by OASIS requirements:

* Summary, 14 March 2006: o The namespace will default to the latest schemas for ebBP core and business signals (for Schema, SignalSchema). o We will ask OASIS to create an alias that allows the namespace to resolve to the latest schema. o Should an implementer desire to resolve to other than the latest schema, a specific schema should be requested. o Any schema changes that occur that create an backwardly incompatible version, the major number will change, i.e. v3.0. o The artifact names will be unique (for example, ebbp-2.0.3.xsd). * OASIS requirement: OASIS has created paths to each TC. Despite the artifact guidelines, the minimum requirement could be that we use this already designated path. [1] For example: o Current: + docs.oasis-open.org/ebxml-bp/Schema/ebbp-2.0 (namespace) + docs.oasis-open.org/ebxml-bp/Schema/ebbp-2.0.3.xsd (specific schema) o Should we be able to negotiate a change: [2] + docs.oasis-open.org/ebxmlbp/Schema/ebbp-2.0 (namespace) + docs.oasis-open.org/ebxmlbp/Schema/ebbp-2.0.3.xsd (specific schema)

Note: Neither of these changes the file names I have used. For example, the file name for the .zip for the .xsd core schema is: ebxmlbp-v2.0.3-Schema-wd-r01-en.zip (no hyphen).

We can further discuss this today. I am uncertain we will be aDale can verify this and add any details prior to a request being made to OASIS webmaster and TC administration.

Thanks and again apologies for this late post.

[1] This is consistent with the comment we made when the TC was asked about the pending ASIS guidelines. [2] This is what is consistent with Stephen's email.

>green: Please may I just bring up the namespace/schema filename matter again. > >Will it be that >xsi:schemaLocation="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ebxmlbp/ebbp-2.0 ebbp-2.0.xsd" >and >xsi:schemaLocation="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ebxmlbp/ebbp-2.0 ebbp-2.0.3.xsd" >are both correct in a document? > >I'm pondering what will happen with standardisation effects resulting in change >of spec version to 2.0.4 (even if the change isn't to the schema content). It >was once assured me that even if the schema filename changes to >ebbp-2.0.4.xsd (and likewise ebbp-signals-2.0.4.xsd) there will be server >magic which means that the filenames ebbp-2.0.xsd and ebbp-signals-2.0.xsd >will still be valid. In that case I'm safe in using >xsi:schemaLocation="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ebxmlbp/ebbp-2.0 ebbp-2.0.xsd" >and ><Specification nameID="gebpss2" name="Exception" >location="ebbp-signals-2.0.xsd"/> >in definition instances, yes? Just need reassurance :-) Sorry to keep pressing >on this. Assurance of no changes to the namespace in particular would >be good too >- that it will stay at http://docs.oasis-open.org/ebxmlbp/ebbp-2.0 >(for 2.0) and not >http://docs.oasis-open.org/ebxmlbp/ebbp-2.0.3, etc > >All the best > >Steve > >