Closed jborbely closed 4 months ago
As discussed, it may be cleaner to create a separate connections register, as the connection information is very dynamic! It could also be a place to note software versions (even though this register may not be subject to strict quality control).
Decide to not include information about connections in the equipment register.
Will consider creating a separate connections-register schema.
This issue will discuss whether
<equipment>
should have a<connection>
child.If yes, then
<connection>
should always exist, but may be empty.One way to define
<connection>
isSome examples how one could implement
<connection>
areUsing type
msl:custom
(essentiallyxsd:any
) as the base type may be too unstructured. For example, we could specify some required elements, like<address>
, so that people can rely on some basic structure and then dump anything else in<properties>
The above examples would then become
People could also maintain a separate Connection Register, without as strict quality control as an Equipment Register, and we could define a separate XSD for connecting to equipment and link records between Equipment and Connection Registers.