Lists Home |
Date Index |
Fraser - some thoughts.....
The issue that I would emphasise is that all usage of data is hierarchical.
This is because there is always a single context for any transaction i.e. a
transaction always has context.
So, the issue is to build a model [an XSD is a model] that suits your
current usage context and build around it.
If the same or similar model is used in another context, transform it. Dont
get hung up on modelling the world before you build your first transaction -
you probably can't get it right for a single transaction, let alone for all
I had a colleague once who [ERD] modelled individual names using 20
different data tables (this exercise in futility was paid for by one of the
top four Australian banks). Not successfull - it modelled the world (of
names) but was not usable for any individual transaction.
We work with a lot of companies who could/would use industry schemas [MDDL,
ACORD, HL7, etc]. You are attempting the same task, albeit within a smaller
domain. All of the companies that I have worked with use the 'other' nodes
liberally. I have never seen an industry schema used as intended . . what
could be the problem??
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fraser Crichton" <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 11:38 AM
Subject: [xml-dev] When to namespace a vocabulary?
> I'm currently developing a set of schemas for a Government Department
> which deals with education and I've got some questions about managing
> dependencies and namespaces. This is a bit tricky to describe so please
> bear with me.
> Currently I have the following namespaces corresponding to individual
> schema files (these are just example dummy URIs to get the concept over)
> LEVEL 1 - "core business object Schemas"
> LEVEL 2 - "Instance Schemas"
> Specific document and message formats which implement various elements
> from each namespace and other OASIS namespaces.
> I'm about to remodel this to avoid dependencies between my level 1 core
> schemas and I also have the feeling that this level or granularity maybe
> unnecessary (?).
> I think I have three options -
> 1) Create one organisation wide namespace containing models of
> classifications, standards and qualifications in the one file (I like this
> because in the future it might be clearer where we can separate out
> namespace specific objects once it's clearer where that may be necessary).
> 2) Chain the Level 1 schemas. My main dependency problem comes when I try
> to model a classification tree that contains standards so I guess I could
> import standards into classifications.
> 3) Create another namespace between level 1 and 2. I don't really think
> that's a solution just an option.
> I guess my main question is -
> What things do you think about when you decide a schema requires split up
> into different namespaces?
> Can you point me at any articles on best practice in this area?
> Does anybody have any thoughts or experience?
> Does anybody know what I'm on about??
> SolNet Solutions Limited
> L12, SolNet House, 70 The Terrace
> PO Box 397, Wellington, Aotearoa / New Zealand
> This email may contain information intended for the sole use of
> the original recipient. Please respect this when sharing or
> disclosing this email's contents with any third party. If you
> believe you have received this email in error, please delete it
> and notify the sender or firstname.lastname@example.org as
> soon as possible. The content of this email does not necessarily
> reflect the views of SolNet Solutions Ltd.
> 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>