[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Mike,
this is the old schema-does-not-support-workflow problem. There is a
way to design around it if you have different message types.. I've
seen a good proposal for FpML that did the following:
- Have a base schema with all attributes optional
- Have a derived schema for every message type that uses redefine to
make certain attributes mandatory, each of the derived schema is in
its own namespace
So there would be a full definition of a trade, with different
attributes required for trading, settlement, ... The details escape me
right now... but I'm sure I can dig them up somewhere.
Christian
> I'm interested in how you tackle the problem of translating
> from business object definitions into message definitions. I'm working with an
> organization that has designed schemas to represent its (many hundreds of)
> business objects, and is now struggling with the question of how to design
> messages for application data interchange that are based on these object
> definitions. The problem is that messages exchange information about a business
> object, and different messages exchange different subsets of the information.
> Making all the information mandatory and thereby forcing the sending application
> to populate the message with data that the recipient doesn't want to know seems
> unproductive; equally, making all the data optional seems to defeat the purpose
> of validation. So it seems that one needs a message definition (=type) for each
> message that is somehow related to the schema for the business object, but isn't
> related to it by one of the recognized mechanisms of restriction and extension.
> It needs some kind of concept of being "derived by
> projection".
> Any thoughts or advice?
>
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/
> From: Chiusano Joseph
> [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
> Sent: 21 June 2005
> 19:30
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: [xml-dev] U.S.
> Federal Goverment's Data Reference Model (DRM) XML Schema
> The XML Cover
> pages just announced[1] the availability of a draft XML schema[2] for the U.S.
> Federal Goverment's Data Reference Model (DRM) initiative. I am posting this
> here to invite comments from the broad XML community as to our approaches for
> this initiative. A specification for the DRM XML Schema is at [4] (includes
> all elements/attributes, their definition, and hyperlinks for efficient
> navigation).
>
> I presented[3] on
> this schema at last week's First Quarterly DRM Public Forum along with Mike
> Daconta (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Metadata Program Manager), who
> is leading this vast interagency effort. We discussed the design factors that
> we took into account regarding the schema, use of existing open standards, and
> other aspects.
>
> If you have
> comments or questions, please feel free to (a) submit them per the
> instructions in [1], (b) express them directly to me, or (c) express them here
> on the XML-DEV listserv.
>
> Thanks,
> Joe
>
> [1] http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2005-06-20-a.html
> (Announcement)
> [2] http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2005-06-20-a.html#schema20050611
> (DRM XML
> Schema)
> [3] http://xml.coverpages.org/DRM-SchemaPresentation20050613.pdf
> (Presentation on
> DRM XML Schema)
> [4]
> http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/drm/schema/Draft_FEA_DRM_Schema.htm
> (DRM XML Schema
> Specification]
>
> Joseph Chiusano
> Booz Allen Hamilton
> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
>
|
