[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
We see loads of conflicts if not outright collisions.
For example, in one court, a judge prescribes
"remedies"; in another, the judge prescribes "dispositions".
Some agencies process events; others process incidents.
God bless NIBRS/UCR. Without a data standard, some
businesses aren't worth getting into, but this is
classic data dictionary work.
In the interagency apps, trying to sort out same name for
different things, different names for same thing is a major
task. We solve them with code transforms (map in the
functions), XSLT (map in the transfer), system lookups
(code tables) but so far, never with XML namespaces.
I think an industry has to be fairly saturated with
XML apps before that happens and as David said, there
is less of this in the wild than some might believe.
I think namespaces are useful at the junction of a 'blind'
exchange. Those may be rare in some domains until the
agencies really open up, but most of the time, messaging
is a baroque dance: detailed and well-planned. Collisions
are a bigger headache for the proposal staff than the
programmers. Maybe messaging systems need namespaces
less than document systems and even then, how often does
one see an app language wrapping another app language?
In theory, yes, but with the exception of how MS does
this in their browser, how often?
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Mayer [mailto:jmayer@kathrein.com]
I'm certainly not up to speed enough on any of the debates to say one
method is better than another, as I'm just getting seriously involved
in using XML around the business, but I do know that there's certainly
a possibility of a real collision happening here. There are a number of
other fields with the same kind of issues in our ERP system, and I can
imagine that other systems would have similar "inbound vs. outbound"
problems with similar names.
|
