[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: building an object model of a XML schema
- From: Jeff Lowery <email@example.com>
- To: "'Thomas B. Passin '" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,"'Xml-Dev (E-mail) '" <email@example.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:40:34 -0700
> Remember that UML as it stands now has some degree of flexibility, you
> use some of your own symbols and apply your own semantics to them. An
> example is OPEN's use of more clearly specified notions of composition
> containment. So there might be some scope for adapting UML for your
Well, that's hopeful.
> I don't really want to model objects or XML, what I'm looking for is
> abstract mapping of types.
.The trouble with this is, I think, that xml "types" generally include
.aspects of the xml syntax - that is, markup issues - but you wouldn't
.this things getting into your abstract "object" model, I imagine.
Yeah, I think I said something about removing the XML-ness from XML Schema
to derive this new schema language, then add in some OO archetypes (types
with well-understood implicit behaviors BUT NO INTERFACE AND NO
IMPLEMENTATION!!! -- thats up to the code generator).
.ASN.1 (yes, that again!) would seem to get quite close to what you have
.said, but it's info set (equivalent) naturally doesn't have many of the
.infoset constructs. So when you want to automatically map asn.1 to xml
.vice-versa, you have to restrict the xml structures that you use. If
.willing to do that, you would definitely have some hope of a mapping
Tom, I've warned you once and I'm not going to tell you again...
Alright, maybe I have to look into more closely. Bleccch, another language;
it never ends.
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
"unsubscribe" in the body to: firstname.lastname@example.org