[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
With an ammendment: if one is using XML for process communication,
one can want to validate the XML against a schema if there is any
chance that another process can touch that file. This takes some
wisdom and smarts about class and message design. The example
that made me add this is the MS configuration file handler. Note
we are inside a framework now, not in an very large open environment
but the concept of schema as a message contract is the same.
so now, irrespective of scale, we have to ask the same questions
about boundaries. A fundamental value is scaling across
the view dimensions, for you chaos/complexity theorists, and
I guess it is the concept of the schema-as-contract. The good
news is that the schema-as-test is useful at different scales
but following that, not the same one, so the notion that we
should fit the schema to the scope is empirically right.
I wonder about that one given correct-by-construction techniques using
components that have not been altered. Agghh... version control rears
its ugly head again. Do I apply it to the component or to the
contract or both? Can I prove it or should I just run it and wait
for the exception to be thrown?
This stuff must drive the framework.xml and application class designers
nuts.
len
From: Bullard, Claude L (Len)
Let's ask the question another way. Considering that a schema
only knows how to do one thing, test conformance of an instance
to itself, where should a schema sit in a model-view-controller
architecture?
|
