W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-aikr@w3.org > May 2020

reflections on StratML

From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 09:00:21 +0800
Message-ID: <CAMXe=SrUm7JMOHRysyUEgbj+Nnkyzqu6YTddUS+6WeMDtaOJeQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: W3C AIKR CG <public-aikr@w3.org>
Owen

after trying out the stratnav application in a demo last week, , I look
forward to be working on the stratml plan for this CG
in the app

My personal opinion as a software/systems engineer. is that the distinction
between stratML 1 and 2
is not good. It makes the schema a bit brittle, easily breakable and
awkward to get ones head and parser around.

The first thing I would do if I had to use it as a standard would be to
have a single
schema.

Some of the elements may be mandatory, like hearders and some elements may
be optional (so that the user
always have to insert the mandatory elements but can select which optional
elements they need in their
instance). This would enhance its robustness and usability

The tool itself may benefit from some tweaking as discussed in offilst email

It is only after we see the output of the parser that the schema can be
fully evaluated and only then we ll know
if stratml may need additional iterations to be optimized/make it smooth

Thought I would throw my two cents in case you decide to develop it
further. I think it could be very useful but it
may need to evolve a bit to fit the use cases

Ill get my hands on the plan as soon as I can. this month I hope
Hope veryone stays safe
PDM
Received on Sunday, 3 May 2020 01:01:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 3 May 2020 01:01:15 UTC