OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Co-operating with Architectural Forms

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicolas LEHUEN [mailto:nicolas.lehuen@ubicco.com]
> Sent: 30 January 2002 17:40
> To: 'Leigh Dodds'; 'xml-dev'
> Cc: 'srn@coolheads.com'
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Co-operating with Architectural Forms
> >Isn't this more work?
> That's what I was telling myself, but I'm not sure I have fully understood
> AFs.
> It seems that format B needs to be redefined to include references to the
> common architecture, is it right ? If I have understood it well, the B DTD
> needs to be modified to include mappings to AFs and the document instances
> in format B must be modified to include PIs that refer to their AF ?

And likewise for Format A, so Company X must also be involved just because 
I want to work with Company Y. Or at the very least I must change 
my processing to add the appropriate AF incantations whilst processing 
both formats.
> In that case, isn't this process more intrusive and costly than having an
> external mapping mechanism ?

This is what I'm trying to narrow in on.

I'm wondering whether AFs is a solution aimed at streamlining the creation 
of vertical XML vocabularies (one doesn't necessarily have to, you define 
an architectural DTD for everyones existing formats), rather than a means 
to facilitate working with multiple vocabularies. Transforms seems a better 
approach in that use case.




News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS