OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Designing XML to Support Information Evolution

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Title: Message
Hi Roger,
I agree with many of the comments put forth so far, but I have a question: In what order did you learn these lessons (no pun intended). It sounded like you learned that order hurts after you had already flattened the structure. So I wonder if the question of processing overhead associated with hierarchal structure was actually an artifact of order not being important? It seems that another lesson that might be learned is that moving nodes around in a hierarchal structure is not so easy in XSLT-- of course DOM (where size allows) is a much better option for that kind of processing.
When Thomas mentioned dependency I started thinking about the picker's dependence on the parent tract (in the original model). The amount of grapes that the picker could pick clearly is dependent upon the amount of ripe grapes in the parent tract and number of active sibling pickers. Here the hierarchy does a good job of grouping where that is maybe more difficult in the flat version.
I was also making guesses about "moving" a picker from one tract to another. I wondered if the picker was known a priori (i.e., looking for a job) or if the tract simply wanted any available picker. If the tract wanted a specific picker (the tract owner's son for instance) then in the real world someone (the application) would have to go and check each tract until they found him-- this again seems like the hierarchal model more adequately represents the real world-- while we can all recognize that simply looping through all of the pickers would be quicker.
This brings me to my next question(s): were the "problems" speed oriented or only difficulty oriented? Other than number of lines, what specifically made it difficult? What did all of those lines contain?
Finally, and as an aside, why didn't you choose to use RDF in the flat model. It seems supremely suited to it. Additionally you could add in various OWL relationships to create new kinds of pickers that can only pick certain kinds of grapes, etc. This is a Semantic Web example waiting to happen. In fact the OWL examples already surround this area [1].
It is a very interesting example : )
Jeff Rafter


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS