OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Russian doll schemas stink? (was: Re: [xml-dev] XML "Smell

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

 >> Russian doll schemas... A veritable dung heap. I am overpowered already :-)
> Hang on a second... what about Russian doll schemas makes them an
> xml-smell? I mean, I can understand situations where openness and shared
> structure are goldmines for interoperability, but I can just as quickly
> think of 10-20 reasons why you would want to localize definitions.

Ah, I was about to concede there and loosen my definition by saying
_when_ they smell.. but that does not make an interesting argument :)

So, I can think of reasons to localize element definitions. I can also
think of (legitimate) reasons to create a 30 method Java class instead
of breaking it up, but that doesn't mean I am 100% happy afterwards. It
works but it smells.

Of course a purist global complex type schema can be hard to stick to,
so in organisations where I have put in place schema design
guidelines, I usually put down the following:
  - No global elements except candidate root elements
  - No inline anonymous type definitions, all elements must reference a
  global type except containers for repeating constructs because they are
  so simple, e.g. businessCenters containing businessCenter*


p.s. To be fair, most of these schemas were on the large side (hundreds of
types or more). The consequence of the strict guidelines was good
reuse, the ability to create a glossary, no hidden information, and so
on... the design guidelines were enforced using an XSLT stylesheet
that created a quality report.


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS