[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
<Quote>
Yes, but there's going to be extreme wariness about anything centralized
in what is fundamentally a markup language that enables
decentralization. That's why even a dumb prefix repository is so
controversial.
</Quote>
Depends on the audience/application of it. In my main client
concentration (Federal government), some of these concepts can be
considered very valuable, especially for promoting interoperability.
Joe Chiusano
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
Jeff Lowery wrote:
>
> [I'm not crossposting this, but you are free to summarize my response if
> there's interest there.]
>
> > From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
>
> > I think you are *very very* close to something, but not quite there.
> > What I mean is this: namespace prefixes in XML
> > schemas/documents are the
> > proverbial "syntactic sugar" - that is, they are really "local" to the
> > XML schema/document in which they are declared.
>
> ok
>
> > However, what really
> > matters is the actual namespace identifier that the prefix represents
> > (that is the "something" that you were close to).
>
> Yes, insofar that any prefix can be assigned to a namespace, and no prefix's
> namespace id mapping can be assumed. But that's not the point of the
> proposal. The proposal makes the prefix the namespace identifier. There is
> no other.
>
> > I believe
> > it would be
> > very beneficial for one to be able to use a "namespace registry", so
> > that they could accurately reference namespace identifiers
> > and "include"
> > them (using term loosely) in XML schemas/documents with
> > whatever prefix
> > they choose.
>
> As Dave V. points out later in this thread, such functionality is already
> encompassed by RDDL. I could see the possibility of enabling the prefix
> registry to point to an RDDL resource, but what I would want ensure (for
> economy, simplicity, and reliability's sake) is that the prefix registry is
> as dumb as feasible and no dumber. Smarts can be layered on top, but those
> smarts would be distinct from the core functionality.
>
> > This opens up all sorts of possibilities in an XML registry, such as:
> >
> > (1)Query on all "XML artifacts" (elements/attributes/datatypes" that
> > are in a given namespace;
> >
> > (2)Reassign XML artifacts from one namespace to another (would
> > automatically search all registered XML schemas/documents for all
> > declarations/use of such artifacts in such namespace and change the
> > namespace identifier in the XML schema/document);
> >
> > (3)Perform an automatic comparison of the "contents" of 2 (or more)
> > namespaces, for harmonization purposes (perhaps an organization has a
> > "test" namespace and an equivalent "production" namespace,
> > and they wish
> > to determine which artifacts need to be promoted from test to
> > production
> > at the proper time);
>
> Yes, but there's going to be extreme wariness about anything centralized in
> what is fundamentally a markup language that enables decentralization.
> That's why even a dumb prefix repository is so controversial.
>
> >
> > ...and countless more.
> >
> > Thanks so much for bringing this idea up.
>
> I don't think the idea is very original, really, but I figure I'd run it up
> the flagpole and see who salutes it.
begin:vcard
n:Chiusano;Joseph
tel;work:(703) 902-6923
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.bah.com
org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team
adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012;
version:2.1
email;internet:chiusano_joseph@bah.com
title:Senior Consultant
fn:Joseph M. Chiusano
end:vcard
|
