Re: [xml-dev] Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is better" ?

["Ken North" <kennorth@sbcglobal.net>]

Roger Costello wrote:
>>   Case 2: Applications operate on the data after the data has been placed
into a (relational) database
>>   Implication: modify the database (tables, primary keys, foreign keys, etc)

Peter Hunsberger wrote:
>> .. you've really got to look at where the data is being used before making
>> any recommendations

>> normalized, flat structures for use in and around the RDB management layer

There's also occasion to use a hybrid design with SQL databases.

My biggest surprise when doing conference presentations about XML and databases
was the number of attendees using SQL databases to archive XML documents in
their native format. The reasons included maintaining audit trails of document
exchanges and satisfying regulatory requirements (e.g., tax returns). Those
types of applications preserved the original documents in a column, for example,
even if they also shredded documents for query performance.

Roger Costello wrote:
>> (1) "Design for today's applications.  The future is unknown."

The guideline for a document archive might be "Design for information
preservation. The future is unknown".

We can't always anticipate the reasons for retrieving a document from an
archive. If there is no other information to provide context, the tags and
structure can communicate a lot of information -- or fail to do so.




======== Ken North ===========
www.WebServicesSummit.com
www.SQLSummit.com
www.GridSummit.com