[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
That's straightforward. The extensions don't scare me.
I have to document three different sets of database
types for every release of our code using Foxpro,
Oracle, and SQL server. Trivial stuff. On the
other hand, a schema of that level of detail isn't
telling one a lot. When they start keeping libraries
of regular expressions (eg, the common guys like Zip codes
or even that ISBN) and controlled vocabularies (eg, list
of postal codes for US, for Canada, etc), and enabling
the user to configure these for enumerated code lists,
that will be very cool. But the schema as provided
is a pretty good place to start. As always, the more
one details a schema, the narrower the
application. Tim is right about the namespaces,
of course, but they don't get much use here anyway.
It will be something of a shock to some of our programmers
when they have to.
One thing to comment on in your writing: it is easy
to use delimited ASCII for these. Why would one want
to use XML?
len
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]
<decloak>
I'm busily writing about Microsoft Office 2003 and its new XML options.
</decloak>
There's lots of interesting stuff here, though it's a pretty mixed bag.
I'd like to hear what people think of the XML, and I suspect this list
is the best place to expose the angle brackets. I'll start with what's
probably the friendliest of the Office XML, if not the one people are
talking about most: Microsoft Access.
I'm still sorting out its import capabilities, but here's what an export
from a three-table query looks like:
|
