FIXML/Schema Implementation Guide

, ,
1

Imported from previous forum

2

First, is there a planned consolidation of the FIXML and FIXML Schema discusssion/working groups? However, if the FIXML Schema initiative is only about development of the xml schema itself, then it would be understandable to keep them seperate… any clarification? The point is ‘where should we be putting these questions?’

Now for the question: are there plans for a FIXML implementation guide that would cover initial FIXML implementation utilizing the new schema? To be even more clear, I’m not talking about converting DTD-based FIXML into schema-based FIXML, I’m talking about a first-time FIXML implementation and doing so on the FIXML schema.

For our group, we’re looking at implementing FIXML internally and since it would be an initial internal implementation of FIX, it would make sense to utilize the new FIXML Schema right out the gate. But since schemas are more complicated than DTD’s, groups that are not entirely up to speed in schemas might have a more difficult time than if they were just to do a DTD-based implementation.

Thanks, John M

3

[ original email was from Jim Northey - jnorthey@jandj.com ]
We do need to add a first time users section to the implementation guide - becomes a question of who is going to do it and how soon.

> First, is there a planned consolidation of the FIXML and FIXML Schema discusssion/working groups? However, if the FIXML Schema initiative is only about development of the xml schema itself, then it would be understandable to keep them seperate… any clarification? The point is ‘where should we be putting these questions?’
>
> Now for the question: are there plans for a FIXML implementation guide that would cover initial FIXML implementation utilizing the new schema? To be even more clear, I’m not talking about converting DTD-based FIXML into schema-based FIXML, I’m talking about a first-time FIXML implementation and doing so on the FIXML schema.
>
> For our group, we’re looking at implementing FIXML internally and since it would be an initial internal implementation of FIX, it would make sense to utilize the new FIXML Schema right out the gate. But since schemas are more complicated than DTD’s, groups that are not entirely up to speed in schemas might have a more difficult time than if they were just to do a DTD-based implementation.
>
> Thanks, John M
>
>

4

[ original email was from Jim Northey - jnorthey@jandj.com ]
We should probably utilize the FIXML discussion group for questions on the usage of FIXML in general, phasing out the FIXML Schema discussion group.

> First, is there a planned consolidation of the FIXML and FIXML Schema discusssion/working groups? However, if the FIXML Schema initiative is only about development of the xml schema itself, then it would be understandable to keep them seperate… any clarification? The point is ‘where should we be putting these questions?’
>
> Now for the question: are there plans for a FIXML implementation guide that would cover initial FIXML implementation utilizing the new schema? To be even more clear, I’m not talking about converting DTD-based FIXML into schema-based FIXML, I’m talking about a first-time FIXML implementation and doing so on the FIXML schema.
>
> For our group, we’re looking at implementing FIXML internally and since it would be an initial internal implementation of FIX, it would make sense to utilize the new FIXML Schema right out the gate. But since schemas are more complicated than DTD’s, groups that are not entirely up to speed in schemas might have a more difficult time than if they were just to do a DTD-based implementation.
>
> Thanks, John M
>
>