Re: [xsch] a proposal to restructure the note

ewallace@cme.nist.gov wrote:
> Jeremy,
> 
> I propose that we break the note you are writing into two parts.  One
> part containing the discussion for naming user defined datatypes and 
> another which covers value space issues.  It seems to me that the 
> former issue is essentially a question of choosing a syntax whereas
> the latter issue potentially requires sorting out mathematical, 
> computational, and engineering views of valuetypes into a single 
> coherent model.  I am worried that packaging these two concerns 
> together will arbitrarily link their life cycles, and thus potentially
> delay the much needed solution for user defined datatype names.
> 
> -Evan
> 
> Evan K. Wallace
> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
> NIST
> 

I think this is a reasonable idea ....
shall we discuss it at the telecon?

We could split it later - the first WD is merely to seek feedback, if 
the feedback comes to easy solutions for both, then we're done. And 
while at this stage the value space one looks harder we may get 
surprises in the new year.

Ralph can probably advise.


Also, assuming we're not planning to rec track this, any suggestion is 
informative, and a 2nd WD that says - there is consensus over user 
defined datatype URIs, and we are still working on value space is not 
really very different from a note with uris and a WD with value spaces 
in terms of status.

Jeremy