[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Michael Champion wrote:
>On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 12:54:22 -0500, Chiusano Joseph
><chiusano_joseph@bah.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@saxonica.com]
>>>Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 12:26 PM
>>>To: 'Christian Nentwich'
>>>Cc: 'Roger L. Costello'; 'XML Developers List'
>>>Subject: RE: [xml-dev] 3 XML Design Principles - a rebuttal
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The only time they need their data
>>>>normalised is at the end of a message flow, when it goes into a
>>>>database, but certainly not in XML transit.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Database design and message design have
>>>quite different requirements and the optimum design for one
>>>is not generally optimum for the other.
>>>
>>>
>>+1
>>
>>I was trying to make a related point in my earlier post today:
>>
>>
>
>Let me jump on the bandwagon here. I think it's dangerous / premature
>to talk about XML-specific design principles, especially independent
>from the application domain. It would be interesting to pursue Kurt
>Cagle's suggestion that what Roger is talking about is a variant of
>Codd's 12 principles for RDBMS
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codd%27s_12_rules. Obviously some are
>not at all applicable to XML, but it would be interesting to explore
>which are. (Note that the conventional wisdom holds that no
>commercially successful RDBMS products adhere to all 12 rules!).
>
> Maybe there are *document* design principles that are quite
>different from database design principles.. That may be what Roger is
>trying to do, but I would be wary of tying them too closely to XML
>idioms. I also think that Michael Kay and Joe Chiusano may be onto
>something that *message* design principles are another thing as well.
>I suppose documents should be optimized for update and display by
>humans, and messages should be optimized for efficient creation,
>transmission, and processing by computer systems ???
>
>I guess my bottom line is that XML is essentially about representing
>documents, data, and messages not about a set of constraints for
>designing them. I would recommend that Roger start his effort by
>checking out the state of the art in conceptual modeling, information
>modeling, database design, etc. and seeing what challenges and
>opportunities XML offers (e.g., by being optimized for implicit
>representation of hierarchical relationships, maybe?),
>
>
and in loose database terms there are three tables involved:
lots, pickers, and pickers in lots. so we would identify the actors
(lots and pickers) explicitly and the create a third table to relate the
two.
our xml message structures reflect this. and then i don't need deep
nesting and id/idref should take care of the details, and it's explicit. :)
rick
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>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://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
>
>!DSPAM:41fd36f1132641133611020!
>
>
>
begin:vcard
fn:Rick Marshall
n:Marshall;Rick
email;internet:rjm@zenucom.com
tel;cell:+61 411 287 530
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard
|
