[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Backward and forward compatible schemas ... RelaxNG --> Yes ... XML Schema --> No
- From: David Carver <d_a_carver@yahoo.com>
- To: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:24:24 -0500
Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I am trying to characterize the types of changes to schemas which
> enable backward and forward compatibility.
>
I even RelaxNG I tend to only think of these things as being in Forwards
compatibility. Backwards compatibility can be maintained if items are
optional. Meaning from my stand point, regardless of what schema
language you use XSD, RNG, SchemaTron, or whatever, it's only backwards
compatibile if you generate an instance that the older version of the
schema understands.
Forwards compatibility is of a more important issue to me when evolving
a data model of any type. Meaning that the instances created in an
older version should still be valid in a newer data model. Java is a
pretty good example in this case, APIs mostly used in JAVA written for
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4...can still run on a JAVA 5 run time without
change. However, JAVA 5 that uses JAVA 5 specific constructs doesn't
necessarily run on a prior version of the runtime.
Maintaining forward compatibility is key is an Industry Standard schema,
as it allows trading partners to exchange information without the older
implementation necessarily having to upgrade. They only need to upgrade
when newer fields need to be there.
The key here is keeping an eye on what you make required and as was
stated before what is changed on the occurrence front. As for the other
comments regarding industry standard schemas, part of the problem with
industry standard schemas is that they take too long to reach the public
again, by that time most business requirements have changed. The
industry standards need to move at a faster pace and take a page from
some of the more agile approaches to development to start releasing
milestone and release candidates instead of waiting every 3 years to get
a standard out. If the industry standard organization took that
approach, it might encourage users to contribute their changes back to
the organizations that maintain the standards.
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]