Robin Cover

XML Daily Newslink. Friday, 27 April 2007
A Cover Pages Publication http://xml.coverpages.org/
Provided by OASIS http://www.oasis-open.org
Edited by Robin Cover

====================================================

This issue of XML Daily Newslink is sponsored by
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://sun.com

====================================================

HEADLINES:

* W3C Announces New Service Modeling Language (SML) Working Group
* Human Readable Resource Identifiers
* NIH Updates Grants Submission Client
* Why E-Books Are Bound to Fail
* How To Navigate a Sea of SOA Standards
* SAXing up the Markup Validator: from Validator to Conformance Checker
* The Open Sourcing of FLEX
* IBM Calls for New SOA Registry Standard

COVER PAGES:

* First W3C Working Draft for Mathematical Markup Language (MathML)
Version 3.0

----------------------------------------------------------------------

W3C Announces New Service Modeling Language (SML) Working Group
Staff, W3C Announcement

W3C has announced the launch of its Service Modeling Language (SML)
Working Group as part of the Extensible Markup Language (XML) Activity.
John Arwe (IBM) and Pratul Dublish (Microsoft) will chair the Working
Group, which is chartered to produce W3C Recommendations for SML,
adding extensions to the W3C XML Schema language for inter-document
references and user-defined constraints. The first face-to-face meeting
will be 11-13 June 2007 in Redmond, Washington, USA, hosted by Microsoft.
This combination of inter-document references and user-defined
constraints is very useful in building complex multi-document models
that capture structure, constraints, and relationships. In the
management domain, these models are typically used to automate
configuration, deployment, monitoring, capacity planning, change
verification, desired configuration management, root-cause analysis
for faults, etc. The facilities defined by this Working Group are
expected to be of general use with arbitrary XML vocabularies, but
the first major use of SML will be to model the structure, relationships,
and constraints for complex information technology services and systems.
Several common and domain-specific models have been built using the
Member Submission version of SML, and many more are under development.
Further, several products and services based on SML are expected to
ship in near future. In addition, SML is relevant to other
standardization efforts that need SML expression of models. To meet
these immediate needs, Service Modeling Language should be standardized
in a timely fashion. Therefore, this Working Group shall be schedule-
driven and the W3C Recommendation for SML shall remain compatible to
the extent possible with the existing SML models. This charter features
an aggressive schedule and a tightly constrained scope designed to
ensure that the SML Working Group will meet its schedule.

http://www.w3.org/XML/SML/
See also the recent news story: http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2007-03-26-a.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Human Readable Resource Identifiers
Norman Walsh and Richard Tobin (eds), IETF Internet Draft

The syntactic constraints of IRIs (RFC 3987) and URIs (RFC 3986)
mandate that certain common punctuation characters (such as spaces,
quotation marks, and various sorts of delimiters) must be percent
encoded. However, it is often inconvenient for authors to encode these
characters. Historically, XML system identifiers and, more generally,
the value of XML attributes that are intended to contain IRIs or URIs
have allowed authors to provide values that use these characters
literally. Several XML-related specifications use strings which are
interpreted as IRIs, but which allow the use of characters which must
be escaped in a legal IRI, such as delimiters and a few ASCII
characters. Examples include XML System Identifiers, the 'rel="nofollow" href'
attribute in XLink, and XML Base attributes. These specifications all
describe, with slightly different wording, the same algorithm for
converting that string to an IRI. The purpose of this RFC is to provide
a single definition which can be referenced by these specifications,
and to provide a name for strings of this type... The memo therefore
defines Human Readable Resource Identifiers, strings which are
interpreted as IRIs, but which allow the use of characters which must
be escaped in a legal IRI, such as delimiters and a few other ASCII
characters. A Human Readable Resource Identifier is a sequence of
Unicode characters that can be converted into an IRI by the application
of a few simple encoding rules. Internationalized Resource Identifiers
(IRIs) extend URIs by allowing unescaped non-ascii characters. Human
Readable Resource Identifiers go further by allowing various ASCII
characters that are illegal in both URIs and IRIs. By escaping these
characters Human Readable Resource Identifiers can be converted to
IRIs, which can in turn be converted to URIs if required. [Note: Work
in this I-D was done initially in the W3C XML Core Working Group.]

http://xml.coverpages.org/draft-walsh-tobin-hrri-00.txt
See also the 'xml-core-wg thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Apr/thread.html#msg26

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NIH Updates Grants Submission Client
Joab Jackson, Government Computer News

The National Institutes of Health has upgraded its client for
electronically checking grant information by way of using the Electronic
Business Extensible Markup Language (EbXML), according to a posting on
the EbXML Forum blog. The NIH Office of Extramural Research upgraded
the client, which is designed to allow external systems interact with
NIH's eReceipts Exchange servers through a Web service interface.
This version should use less memory and run more quickly. The new
S2Sclient uses version 5 of the open source Apache Tomcat application
server software and requires version 1.5 of the Java Development Kit.
In February 2007, NIH started requiring all major grant proposals be
submitted electronically. The shift marks a major milestone in NIH's
transition to receive all grant applications electronically. NIH began
with the electronic submission of Small Business Innovation Research
applications last December [2006]. Since that time, NIH has received
more than 18,000 unique grant applications. The transition to electronic
submission requires that two systems with their own registration and
validation processes work together. Those are Grants.gov, the
government's single online portal to find and apply for federal funding,
and eRA Commons, the system that allows applicants to interact
electronically with NIH. Organizations using forms-based submission will
rely on the PureEdge forms viewer provided free of charge by Grants.gov;
organizations desiring a systems-to-systems approach can work with
Grants.gov to develop their own data exchange system (XML datastream).
NIH Web Services: NIH offers web services for querying the status of
grant applications, verifying person information details, updating
person information details and requesting validation response messages.
The eRA eXchange is the system for the transfer of grant applications
and other grant-related data. The eXchange enables authorized grantee
institution or service-provider systems to transmit grant applications
as Extensible Markup Language (XML) data streams through Grants.gov to
NIH. Likewise, the eXchange allows NIH to send XML-based data streams
to these service providers and institutions. The eXchange uses Simple
Object Access Protocol (SOAP) with attachments (SwA) over Hypertext
Transfer Protocol over Secure Socket Layer (HTTPS).

http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/43557-1.html
See also e-applications: http://era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt/

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Why E-Books Are Bound to Fail
Mike Elgan, Computerworld

E-books, those flat electronic tablets designed for reading downloadable,
software-based books, are often packed with advanced displays and other
leading-edge technology. Every time a new e-book comes out, a ripple
of chatter spreads through the gadget enthusiast community. Technology
news sites cover such product and research announcements like major news,
similar to the announcement of a new iPod or smart phone. Engadget and
Gizmodo blog them without fail. Even The New York Times tech columnist
David Pogue and The Wall Street Journal tech columnist Walt Mossberg
have taken the time to test and review e-books. Companies like Sony,
Panasonic, Hitachi and Fujitsu have devoted millions of dollars over
the past couple of decades developing what they hope will be a device
that replaces the paper book -- the first disruptive shift in the way
people read books since the Gutenberg Bible in the 15th century. A
lineup of the major e-books (almost) on the market: Sony Reader; eRead
StarEBook; Jinke Electronics HanLin eBook; iRex iLiad; Panasonic Words
Gear; Bookeen Cybook; Hitachi Albirey; Fujitsu Flepia. Unfortunately,
these products, as well as the whole product category, are destined for
failure. They're expensive. The hardware costs hundreds of dollars.
Worse, books tend not to be hugely discounted in electronic form:
[one example] costs $11.20 on Amazon.com, while the same book in
electronic format on eBooks.com costs $9.95, so you save $1.25. Another
huge barrier to the growth of the e-book market is that everyone already
has alternatives: you can read written content on your PC; in fact,
you're doing it right now, on tablet PCs, laptops, cell phones and PDAs.
[Note: Open XML-delivery formats exist, but that doesn't make the
e-book products open. Elgan might have elaborated on the DRM problem: you
can share a paper-print book you purchased with anyone, or re-sell it.]

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9017934

----------------------------------------------------------------------

How To Navigate a Sea of SOA Standards
Bob Violino, CIO Magazine

While the potential benefits of SOA are clear, like the ability to
reuse existing assets, the standards picture looks anything but settled.
Not only did Forrester Research count some 115 standards floating around
SOA and Web services in its most recent study on that topic, but also,
it found that just confirming which vendors support which standards is
nearly impossible. Yet CIOs must press ahead with SOA projects in order
to meet business needs. Hong Zhang, director and chief architect of IT
Architectures and Standards at General Motors, has been balancing the
standards dilemma with ongoing SOA work for several years. For its part,
General Motors learned in its early SOA efforts to identify which
standards were most important to what the company was trying to achieve.
For GM today, the most important specs are those that help standardize
the interfaces among services across the well-defined service layers
(presentation, business process and so on) The next most important are
those that help standardize the implementation of the services within
each of the service layers. As part of developing its enterprisewide SOA
strategy, the company is identifying the SOA standards around which of
its needs are mature, which should be monitored and which are mandatory.
Among these, GM is looking at WS-I Basic Profile 1.1 for enterprisewide
interoperability. After this, the company will be able to make a well-
informed decision about which vendors and products to use in its broad
rollout of SOA. Another SOA adopter, TD Banknorth, has taken a strategy
of prioritizing standards adopted by vendors recognized as market
leaders in the SOA space (for example, webMethods) and standards
recognized by several key standards organizations.

http://www.cio.com/article/104007/How_To_Navigate_A_Sea_of_SOA_Standards

----------------------------------------------------------------------

SAXing up the Markup Validator: from Validator to Conformance Checker
Olivier Thereaux, W3C QA News and Articles

The next version of the W3C Markup Validator is gearing up for an
upcoming release, via a two-weeks or more beta test period. This new
version has improvements in pretty much every area: reliability of
validation results, new features, speed improvements, better UI...
Many of the improvements and changes have been made possible by using
a number of new or updated tools and libraries... Validation, roughly
speaking, is the process of comparing a document written in a certain
language against a machine-readable grammar for that language. So,
when the validator checks a document written in HTML 4.01 Strict, it
doesn't actually know any of the prose that one can find in the HTML
4.01 Specification, it just knows the machine-readable grammar (called
a DTD in the case of HTML, and most markup languages standardized to
date). In some ways, that is a good thing: prose can be ambiguous, a
DTD is not. But there are some things you can not define, or enforce,
with a DTD: for example, attribute values are defined as being of a
certain type (identifier, URI, character data), but their value itself
can not be enforced with a DTD. As long as the validator remains a
validator stricto sensu, validation will be one of its main
limitations... What if the validator knew about the prose in the HTML
specifications? Would it not solve the problem? It would help. Of
course, the validator would no longer be a validator, but instead
entering the realm of conformance checkers. The latest version of the
validator can now spot documents in XHTML missing the xmlns attribute
for the root html element. The technical side of the issue is now
closed, but most of the problems are on the road ahead: (1) The wardens
of a certain definition of "validator" will probably not be pleased
by such a blatant drifting from formal validation into conformance
checking. (2) Some users of the validator will be puzzled to see
their once-validating documents now rejected by the validator. It is
a natural reaction, particularly from users who tend to consider the
validator as a 'reference', forgetful that any software may have bugs,
ignoring the too-often-seen note that 'the validator's XML support
has some limitations' One way to please everyone may be to only issue
warnings, not errors...

http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/03/validation_to_conformance.html
See also Validator 0.8.0 upgrade notes: http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/04/validator_080_upgrade_notes.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Open Sourcing of FLEX
Kurt Cagle, O'Reilly Opinion

Adobe announced a few days ago that they would be open sourcing the
FLEX API and framework... Adobe and Microsoft have long been engaged
in a quiet cold war that has, at its base, control of the way that
information is presented - how documents are laid out and fonts are
displayed, how vector graphics work in two, three and four dimensions
(assuming time as the fourth), how we build user interfaces for
everything from game programming to advertisements to forms. Adobe,
Microsoft and the W3C have each established differing approaches to
this problem of presentation, the first two by creating proprietary
standards and technologies on top of them, the last by creating open
standards and encouraging the use of these standards by others to
build the technologies. The Open-sourcing of Flex represents a fairly
dramatic shift in this particular struggle, one which will likely
have ramifications lasting for years. The catalyst was the rebranding
of XAML/Avalon, first as Windows Presentation Framework (WPF) and now
as the newly rechristened 'Silverlight'. Silverlight has its problems,
but it is undeniably powerful, and the combination of XML technology
and the support for rich graphics places it squarely in the middle of
the presentation space. Moreover, with a formal name comes a greater
focus and more money for marketing, and I suspect that the light is
finally coming on not just at the product team level but throughout
the company that Microsoft cannot lose this fight. With release of the
Flex API, Adobe essentially provide a universal framework for vector
graphics that works on any platform, not just on Windows. It means
that I as a programmer can build applications that are highly performant
and work across platforms, can do so from a Linux box or a Mac laptop,
and that can work well with my XML data streams. This is about more
than just pretty vector graphics; this determines the toolkits that
developers will end up using for all of their applications, knowing
that they can work just as readily within a browser as within a
standalone application... I'd like to say that I think this will be
a good thing for SVG, but I cannot figure out how.

http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2007/04/the_open_sourcing_of_flex.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------

IBM Calls for New SOA Registry Standard
Joe McKendrick, ZDNet Blog

IBM spokespeople are saying that the UDDI standard for registries isn't
cutting it, and the "time is now" for a new registry standard more
focused on today's SOA realities. In the meantime, IBM will be offering
a proprietary solution. In a new report in ITWeek, IBM managers state
that SOAs have stretched the Universal Description, Discovery and
Integration (UDDI) web services standard to the limit, and that it's
time for a new standard. Burton Group's Anne Thomas Manes had just
issued a report that IBM's WebSphere Service Registry and Repository
(WSRR) 6.0.1 doesn't fully support UDDI, the commonly accepted standard
behind SOA registries. IBM, however, says that UDDI was originally
designed for Web services, which invoke point-to-point connections
across the network. (In fact, it was designed to be the "Yellow Pages"
of the e-business world.) But what enterprises need now is a registry
standard that addresses the building-block, enterprise approach of SOA,
Big Blue says. SOAs require different information about services than
do Web services, IBM claimed. According to Sunil Murthy, a manager for
WebSphere Service Registry and Repository at IBM's Software Group, UDDI
will not allow for role-based access to services, does not let companies
manage a service's life cycle to enable governance, and does not allow
for services to be searched. The IBM representatives quoted in the
article could not predict what a new registry standard would or should
look like, but said vendors should take their time in sorting things out.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=864
See also Burton: http://searchwebservices.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid26_gci1252107,00.html

======================================================================
Selected From The Cover Pages, by Robin Cover
======================================================================

First W3C Working Draft for Mathematical Markup Language (MathML)
Version 3.0

W3C has announced the publication of a First Public Working Draft the
Mathematical Markup Language (MathML 3.0). The Working Group was
re-chartered to enhance MathML to better support internationalization
of mathematics, accessibility, semantic encoding of mathematics, Unicode
alignment, and precise control of rendering for print publishing. MathML
is an XML application for encoding both mathematical notation and
semantic structure of mathematical content. The goal of MathML is to
enable mathematics to be served, received, and processed on the World
Wide Web, just as HTML has enabled this functionality for text.
According to the specification abstract, MathML can be used to encode
both mathematical notation and mathematical content. About thirty-five
(35) of the MathML tags describe abstract notational structures, while
another about one hundred and seventy provide a way of unambiguously
specifying the intended meaning of an expression. Additional chapters
discuss how the MathML content and presentation elements interact, and
how MathML renderers might be implemented and should interact with
browsers. The WD document addresses the issue of special characters
used for mathematics, their handling in MathML, their presence in
Unicode, and their relation to fonts. While MathML is human-readable
in all but the simplest cases, authors use equation editors, conversion
programs, and other specialized software tools to generate MathML.

http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2007-04-27-a.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------

XML Daily Newslink and Cover Pages are sponsored by:

BEA Systems, Inc. http://www.bea.com
IBM Corporation http://www.ibm.com
Primeton http://www.primeton.com
SAP AG http://www.sap.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://sun.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------

XML Daily Newslink: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletter.html
Newsletter subscribe: newsletter-subscribe@xml.coverpages.org
Newsletter ***: newsletter-***@xml.coverpages.org
Newsletter help: newsletter-help@xml.coverpages.org
Cover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to newsletter list

Date:

From:

Subject:

XML Daily Newslink. Friday, 27 April 2007