[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
a quick read through the replies to this post shows some interesting stuff:
1. edi is slandered - i agree that was unnecessary, particularly as
there's no reason to believe it is going to be any easier of harder to
set up with multiple trading partners (apologies to oasis and ebxml)
2. flexibility can only be measured in terms of use - and it seems to me
that all or some of the technologies mentioned might have something to
do with use - but until the problem is better described, who knows. a
better question might be "would a system based on xml and xslt be more
flexible than a proprietary solution for converting electronic documents
to backend applications?"
3. in an interesting experiment on child development (on a tv program
..... ) children were shown beating adults at a game of matching pairs
of cards face down on a table - game has lots of names. the children won
because they weren't distracted by layouts of cards on the table, dinner
burning, etc - they just matched pairs. if you have more than a bit of
experience you have too many real life experiences and distractions to
be able to pass an exam like this.
4. does the quiz help get more practioners into the xml world? if it
does, i'd accept it for what it is - just another test someone has to
pass to advance their career.
ok, i've moved on....
rick
Razvan MIHAIU wrote:
>Hi,
>
>
>
>
> In an XML quiz I found the following question:
>
>
>
>
>A company wants to develop an EDI system, which will help it to integrate with
>its various trading partners (suppliers and clients). Their previous attempt
>failed, as it required a unique implementation for each pair of trading
>partners. Now they want to explore the capabilities of XML to make this system
>efficient.
>
>The company wants to keep the structure of XML documents flexible and open to
>future changes. Which of the following is most likely implied by this
>requirement ?
>
>A. XML Schema;
>B. mixed content model;
>C. XSL stylesheets;
>D. validating parser;
>
>
>
>
>Correct answer: B
>My choice: A
>
>
> Isn't this a dumb question ? I mean if you choose A you can certainly use mixed
>content model with XML Schema, so answer A and B are not exclusive.
>
> What I am really trying to understand is "what is flexibility" ? In any XML
>document you can add elements and attributes at will if you update the
>associated schema. Old applications would just ignore the new elements and
>attributes, so "flexibility" is build-in into XML. So, what are you doing when
>you want to design a flexible XML document ?
>
> Can somebody give me an example of an XML document that is *not* flexible as
>opposed to one that it is ?
>
>
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Razvan
>
>
>www.mihaiu.name
>
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>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:42222721209416733942835!
>
>
>
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
|
