[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
[Roger L. Costello
> I have some questions about something that you said: "Applications come
and go
> but data lives forever". I believe that when you say "data" you are
referring
> just to the string:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <aircraft>
> <elevation>12000</elevation>
> </aircraft>
>
> and not to any data model that might be associated with this string.
Thus,
> this string endures over time but not data models (or applications).
Right?
>
> This seems a bit unsettling to me. It is the data model that provides
meaning
> to the string. The data model allows me to understand the aircraft and
> elevation elements. I would imagine that it is the combination of the
data
> and the data model which endure. What are your thoughts on this? /Roger
Say I want to compare the elevation to the minimum allowed by FAA regs for
that location. The regs probably contain it as a string somewhere. Now I
have to do some completely different steps to make the comparison, somethng
unforeseen when both the schema and the regulation were created. The number
in my document and the number in the reg live on in some form, destined to
be reused in many ways.
On the other hand, with many of these strong-typing-desiring applications,
the data probably will not live on. It is ephemeral, designed for one short
transaction and never to be seen again. So the objection would perhaps have
the least effect in these cases. Nevertheless, I want to be able to get
hold of the original contents in those elements, even if I can also get
their data types.
Cheers,
Tom P
|
