[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: "Frank Manola" <fmanola@acm.org>, "Roger L. Costello" <costello@mitre.org>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] 3 XML Design Principles - a rebuttal
- From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:26:08 -0500
- Cc: "XML Developers List" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Thread-index: AcUHGHWcova7UbfbQQ+H/rcKyzlYHwAEvj2w
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] 3 XML Design Principles - a rebuttal
+1
Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Booz Allen Hamilton
Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Manola [mailto:fmanola@acm.org]
> Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 5:15 PM
> To: Roger L. Costello
> Cc: 'XML Developers List'
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] 3 XML Design Principles - a rebuttal
>
> Roger--
>
> This is getting there, but it seems to me there's a basic
> idea that needs to be more explicit, and catered to, in much
> of your exposition.
> It's embedded in some of your examples, and several of the
> earlier respondents have mentioned it using different words.
> The principle is that designs (of anything) need to be
> evaluated with respect to satisfying an identified set of
> requirements. Designs don't exist in a vacuum. In other
> words, extend what you say below: "Every engineering
> decision has its pros and cons", to read something like
> "Every engineering decision has its pros and cons *with
> respect to satisfying specific requirements*". What's the
> problem you're trying to solve with a given design?
>
> Your summary of coupling illustrates some awareness of this
> point, where you note the relationship of coupling to
> processing requirements. On the other hand, your summary of
> principle #3 refers to "ease of management" and "ease of
> understanding" in a rather general way. What kind of
> "management" or "understanding"? (E.g., I can think of
> situations where it's the nested form that's easier to
> understand; that's why so many forms use nesting, rather than
> small chunks with lots of internal identifiers).
>
> Another point that may also be worth mentioning is that often
> a particular requirement can be satisfied in more than one
> way, and you need to take that into account too. For
> example, in your initial example you discuss explicit vs.
> implicit relationships. Explicit relationships are a good
> idea in general, but there's often more than one way to
> provide information about a relationship. In this example,
> for instance, you separate pickers and lots and show the
> relationship with a locatedOn attribute. But there are
> alternatives. For example (considering just this one issue
> in isolation):
>
> * if that's the only relationship between pickers and lots,
> and you don't want to cater for later extensions to represent
> other relationships, then you could have continued to use the
> nested structure, and indicated (if necessary, in a
> machine-processable form of some kind) the "meaning" of the
> relationship in a separate document of some kind (i.e.,
> saying in effect "pickers contained in lots are those located there")
>
> or
>
> * you could have added an additional nested element, as in
>
> <Lot id="1">
> <ripe-grapes>4</ripe-grapes>
> <pickersLocatedAt>
> <Picker id="John">
> <metabolism>2</metabolism>
> <grape-wealth>20</grape-wealth>
> </Picker>
> </pickersLocatedAt>
> </Lot>
>
> Those alternatives may be better or worse with respect to
> some requirements (or processing assumptions) you have in
> mind, but what are those requirements?
>
> --Frank
>
>
> Roger L. Costello wrote:
> >
> > Outstanding discussion! Thanks Christian for keeping me honest.
> > Every engineering decision has its pros and cons. I failed to
> > consider that in my original post. So, I have completely
> rewritten my
> > original post to (hopefully) reflect a more balanced perspective.
> > Have I fairly captured the pros and cons of the 3 issues I try to
> > address? /Roger
> >
> >
>
> snip
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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>
>
>
|