[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: building an object model of a XML schema
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Jeff Lowery <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:06:12 -0500
"Are there enough conceptual archetypes that would provide enough
information to allow generation of
efficient object model representations? "
Got a headache now? Just wait. That way lies groves and grove plans.
XML Schema is likely to get us through the next couple of years of the
web coming up to speed with markup systems. A lot of this depends on
who ends up on the TAG and their backgrounds. My opinion is
eventually, markup solutions tend to converge in pretty much the same
place they did last time round this track with different names. So,
keep a copy of the SGML Handbook and hope the papers from 89 to 96
are still available just in case you want to prognosticate. So far,
not too much is new as a result of XML except cheaper software.
For now, Schemas will do. DTDs functionally worked ok if one
understood where to stop trying to stuff properties into them and
creating engorged definitions. The phrase "markup is not programming"
should be nailed to front of your machine. There will always be
things objects do better but as soon as you do that, you have to
commit to a language and if as for so many, that language is wholly
owned by a company, that isn't a good long term solution. Then there
is XML which is a product, but at least we can back up to SGML if and
when we need to. Even if some think that is a pestilence, I think they
have to live a little longer to understand why range wars forced
the government to finally send troops into the west. As long as we can
always get to
the escape hatch, I am not concerned. If that gets welded closed
by the TAG or anyone else, it will be time to find a different authority.
At that point, the W3C will have overstepped its mandate and outlived
Public regulation of the Internet will be a necessity in the
coming years. That is unavoidable. Advanced planners will have to begin to
consider how that is to be achieved for a global and international system.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Jeff Lowery [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Or maybe one could come up with a data model with types rich enough to serve
both masters. A hash map is, after all, a type that is universally
understood, it's just not a datatype, because it needs methods to work.
Maybe it could be called an archetype. Are there enough conceptual
archetypes that would provide enough information to allow generation of
efficient object model representations? I would think so, STL and
classes.zip has a bunch identified. The problem then becomes: can I easily
map datatypes to archetypes? If so, I can then build a upon whatever object
code is generated by the conceptual model, and the constraints will be
identical to those in my data model.
Ouch. Now I have a headache...