Re: [xml-dev] Should one adopt the tag naming convention of anexisting X

[cbullard@hiwaay.net]

Now the DTDs are huge polyglots that mix the two concepts of content  
and structural naming.  The rear tabular matter is mostly content  
named.  The front matter (eg, maintenance procedures, theory of ops)  
tend to be all structural names (chapter, volume, etc.).  The CALS  
tables are still in there but there are fewer of them.  It's an  
interesting panoply of every approach we've tried.

A more interesting question asked before and answered by folks like  
Eliot Kimber is when one should use XML type ids and idrefs.  I used  
to say there was no cost to having an id so go ahead, but that isn't  
really true and I was wrong.  A #REQUIRED ID is... required and when  
one has to manually scrub a large file, these little bits of cruft  
become odious.

len

Quoting "W. Hugh Chatfield" <csi2000@urbanmarket.com>:

> What I know from my past projects is that the naming conventions  
> depend a lot on what you are trying to model with the DTD, and the  
> end users of your model.  (assuming DTD here - but could be schemas,  
> etc.  these project were from way back). For example, the CALS DTD.  
>  THe US CALS DTD was basically a model of the "documents" being  
> produced.  In other words, they used text concepts like volume,  
> chapter, section, para, table, etc. When I worked on the CALS DTD  
> for Canada it was decided the DTD would be a model of "equipment"  
> not "documents" - hence there were tags  introduced for concepts  
> like assembly (recursive) and for each assembly there were parts  
> list, trouble shooting tables, equipment description, repair  
> instructions, etc.  Sure ultimately, when the content wound up as  
> "text", it made sense to use textual tags - section, para, etc. -  
> and there we could have adopted common tag names - but even these  
> would have specific equipment tags in the mixed content sections.  
>  Tables weren't columns and rows, they were symptoms, test  
> procedure, repair procedure, etc. - but were still rendered as a  
> table. When working with the Department of Justice - it was decide  
> to use tag names that the authors of legislative text (lawyers and  
> legal specialists) already understood and were in use from authoring  
> all the way through parliament.  This was before any generic  
> legislative DTDs hit the market.  We tried to minimize the  
> disruption in the authoring process on the switch from a highly  
> customized older version of Word-Perfect to SGML. So I have always  
> found context and end users to be the driving force, when a  
> "standard" DTD was not available.  Maybe if you are trying to decide  
> a tag name from 3 different vocabularies, you would pick the one  
> with the greatest degree of fit to your end user... whatever degree  
> of fit might mean in your environment. Cheers....Hugh
>
> UBL is in your future....  http://goUBL.com
>
> On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 19:14:24 +0000, "Costello, Roger L."  
> <costello@mitre.org> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>>
>> I am about to create an XML vocabulary. My XML vocabulary will  
>> leverage (reuse) three existing, mature XML vocabularies. So my XML  
>> instances will consist of tags that I created and tags from the  
>> existing, mature XML vocabularies. For the tags that I create, what  
>> tag naming convention should I use? Here are two possibilities:
>>
>> 1. I will create a my own tag naming convention, independent of the  
>> XML vocabularies that I will use. 2. I will adopt the tag naming  
>> convention of one of the XML vocabularies that I will use. (Which  
>> one?)
>>
>> What do you recommend? What are the tradeoffs?
>>
>> /Roger
>>  
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>
>
>