[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
To further clarify this point, an XML Schema processor accepts one or more XML infosets as input (and an XML Infoset looks a lot like an instance of the XPath data model) from which it generates schema components which could be represented in an XML serialized form (as shown by XSV's PSVI output).
All you are arguing is that your application would rather expose a data model that more closely represents XML Schema components than an XML representation of XML Schema components. I don't see anything wrong with this which was the entire point of my analogy with the relational data model and customer database. What percentage of applications actually expose the same data [or object[ model as is used by the back end relational database or file based data store? This is extremely unlikely for any application that uses a denormalized relational database.
________________________________
From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@microsoft.com]
Sent: Sat 5/24/2003 11:44 AM
To: Murali Mani
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: Re: [xml-dev] Syntax + object model
A book is made up of a sequence of characters which are grouped into words and clustered together to form paragraphs. Whatever semantics one wants to give the words, chapters, etc beyond that is up to the author and the reader. A dictionary is a fundamentally different kind of book from a bible which is fundamentally different from a text book and people read all three in different ways. I don't see why one would then disagree over whether the content of all books have underlying core aspects that are universal. This clearly the case as is the case with XML documents.
As for your request for a query, it wouldn't be easy to write but is possible. I know this because any XML Schema processor is doing exactly the same thing to build up its schema components because it accepts an XML infoset as input from which it generates schema components.
I'd love to provide the XQuery query as a proof of concept but don't have the time right now. I'm sure I'll end up sending you one some weekend when a free afternoon presents itself. :)
________________________________
From: Murali Mani [mailto:mani@CS.UCLA.EDU]
Sent: Sat 5/24/2003 11:25 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: Re: [xml-dev] Syntax + object model
Anyways, that is ok. My point is the view given by XPath/XQuery is not
good for all XML documents, especially XML schemas. I do not want to see
an XML schema document in this model, it does not mean anything to me at
all, right??
As I said, I will be very glad to receive an XPath/XQuery to determine
given an XML schema, a tag A, and a tag B, whether B can be a descendant
of A in a valid XML document.
I did mention this when your work was presented at Hong Kong last year by
your colleague, but I will be very glad to see an actual answer to this..
regards - murali.
On Sat, 24 May 2003, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> I explicitly did not say that. Please reread my post.
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Murali Mani [mailto:mani@CS.UCLA.EDU]
> Sent: Sat 5/24/2003 10:51 AM
> To: Dare Obasanjo
> Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: Re: [xml-dev] Syntax + object model
>
>
>
>
> Dare, I do not think you can say that XPath data model is the standard
> data model for all applications.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
