Re: [xml-dev] XML schema Management

["Fraser Goffin" <goffinf@googlemail.com>]

>One area where I'm still very ambivalent is whether different messages
>should use the same namespace, given that they might apply different rules
>to the same elements

Interesting. Some suggest that it is absolutely essential that each
data item that appears in the context of business service schema
should expose it lineage to the master schema/data model (or at least
identify the version of that data item).

Further that each item has a clear and explicit semantic that isn't
changed in any way through it use in the specific context of the
service's message (that is, a customer as defined by the core business
domain model is still a customer in a message, an address is an
address yadda yadda). However as you say, the question of namespace
visibility then arises as does the 'total' global element/type (aka.
garden of eden) approach to schema design versus other models which
enable reuse but allow namespace 'hiding'. Some seem to prefer the
elementForm='unqualified' ?

Fraser.

On 08/09/06, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote:
> >
> > So are you talking about auto generating a bunch of schemas
> > based on a core description of the data model and a set of
> > rules for getting from the core description to each
> > individual case you need?  Or am I misunderstanding?
>
> Yes. But perhaps not so much a core description of the data model, more a
> set of reusable and parameterizable components that can be included in
> messages, combined with a description of each message in terms of which
> components to include (as required, optional, or repeating).
>
> One area where I'm still very ambivalent is whether different messages
> should use the same namespace, given that they might apply different rules
> to the same elements.
>
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/
>
>