Re: [Soaplab2-dev] Re: Soaplab-two-dev digest, Vol 1 #3 - 1 msg

[Jon I. <ji...@eb...>]

Thanks for the reply

I'm not sure myself whether the difference is just conceptual or whether
in practice we'll need to work with two different files.

It seems sensible for the EMBOSS distibution to include a schema for the
current ACD syntax because many projects (other than SOAPLAB) would use it.

Whether the distributed schema should be identical to or a subset of the one
used in SOAPLAB isn't clear to me yet.  I suspect it depends on the number
and nature of the differences, requirements of interface developers (some
people might only want the EMBOSS part) and the best route for support and
maintainance.

Presumably the EMBOSS bods will want to extend things as new applications are
added to EMBOSS, whereas the SOAPLAP bods will want to extend things as new
services are supported, which suggests managing it as a "schema in two parts"
could be appropriate.

Cheers

Jon


>> Last thought is that it might be sensible if the XML schema used by SOAPLAB (or indeed
>> any interface to EMBOSS) was managed as an extension to the (more basic) ACD-XML schema.
>>
>    You said it already before. I still need to be convinced that there is
> a difference between them. If ACD is just for EMBOSS then yes, there will
> be a difference, but I considered always to have ACD for any command-line
> application - so its XML schema should be actually thye same as the
> Soaplab one.
>
>    Cheers,
>    Martin