[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hi
Thanks all for quick response.
This is the link to Mignet et al (2003) paper :
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/rd/86898281%2C548405%2C1%2C0.25%2CDownload/http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/cache/papers/cs/26781/http:zSzzSzwww.cs.toronto.eduzSz%7EmignetzSzPublicationszSzMBV.pdf/mignet03web.pdf
It is good idea to make variations of XML Schemas languages.
However, the integrity constraints which are effective for data
integration (keys), query optimization and semantic specification, are
important aspects.
These aspects are extremely important in XML databases.
You don't think so, that an adequate schema is required to cover
database requirements? And the current extents of schemas are
inadequate?
Any way, how we can know the current extent of types of documents
whether its XML DTD or XML Schema, or even other kinds of documents?
I mean an organization on the Internet or new paper (because Mignet et
al (2003) paper's is quiet old)
Thanks.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 22:15:05 +1100, Rick Jelliffe <ricko@allette.com.au> wrote:
> Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>
> >Adi Eio <adieio@gmail.com> writes
> >
> >>So, is it still right, and how I can know the current extent of XML
> >>Schema on the Web?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >So yes, in some sense it's right that very few XML documents
> >explicitly reference W3C XML Schemas. But without sampling XML
> >documents out there, checking their namespaces, if any, etc., it's
> >very hard to get an objective measurement.
> >
> >
> To add to what Henry has said, it is also perhaps more important to know
> that the way people use XML Schemas is different from DTDs. XML Schemas
> are often used to generate applications or interfaces or mappings,
> rather than
> for validation or value defaulting per se.
>
> And the number of documents on the Web is a dodgy measurement anyway.
> Messages are dynamically generated and don't sit in a file system, so they
> won't get counted. Intermediate documents are similarly not available.
> Perhaps a better count would be how many projects use XML Schemas
> and how well they fared with it. And even then, due to the
> <euphemism>power</euphemism> of XML Schemas, or anything else,
> often the satisfaction is more related to the tools used and the skills
> level of
> the wetware.
>
> I have seen many people happy with XML Schemas: all of them have used it
> very conservatively and all in conjunction with DBMS or
> transaction/messaging
> systems.
>
> Cheers
> Rick Jelliffe
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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>
>
>
|
