[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Anders W. Tell" <anderst@toolsmiths.se>
- To: John.OSullivan@chase.com
- Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 10:57:47 +0200
One way of looking at it is through OO lenses. In most OO languages and
practices
collections are a first class consideration, even in UML multiplicity is
modelled.
Since an XML stream is only an encoding of something and if this something is
based on a
OO model then collections may, IMO should, be explicitly represented in the XML
encoding.
There are at least three ways to encode an array *stereotype*:
1.
<items kind="C++ templates,STL">
<item/>
</items>
2.
<collection kind="generic collection" length="1">
<item/>
</collection>
3.
<array kind="generic array with relationship info">
<array-member name="local name">
<item/>
</array-member>
</array>
The difference between 2. and 3. encoding *forms* is that in 3. relationship
related information may be encoded in the <array-member> element.
This means that all contained elements DTD or schema does not need to be changed
depending on its container and the relationship between them.
Simple UML model: <http://xiop.sourceforge.net/doc/images/ContainerRC.jpg>
/Anders
--
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
/ Financial Toolsmiths AB /
/ Anders W. Tell /
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|