Re: [xml-dev] XML Schema: "Best used with the ______ tool"

[Dennis Sosnoski <dms@sosnoski.com>]

Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> Hi Dennis,
>
> Dennis Sosnoski <dms@sosnoski.com> writes:
>
>   
>> I personally think it's better to start from code and  use data binding
>> tools that allow clean schema generation, since the  schema generated by
>> one data binding tool will generally be usable with other tools of the
>> same type.
>>     
>
> Hm, that would require that data binding tools support conversion
> in both directions, schema to programming language and programming
> language to schema.

Most of the tools I'm aware of (Java and .Net) do support bidirectional 
conversions.

>  Imagine also a group working on a schema for
> an XML vocabulary. Some use C++, some Java, and some C#. I can only
> imagine what a nightmare it would be if each modelled the vocabulary
> in their programming language; each would have to merge changes in
> the schema (produced by other members) to the model in their 
> programming language.
>   

I'd think you'd want to pick one data model to use as your "master", 
then regenerate the schema from that and regenerate the other language 
models from the schema.

> I think it is quite clear that the specification of the vocabulary 
> (schema) is primary and mappings to programming languages are secondary.
>   

I'm not disagreeing with you on this - since XML is what's being 
exchanged, you want to have a definitive description of that XML. I just 
think you'll have a more suitable schema if you start by generating it 
from code rather than if you start designing a schema in isolation.

  - Dennis