Re: [xml-dev] Incongruous UML data models and XSD data models

[Peter Flynn <peter@silmaril.ie>]

On 06/27/2016 03:58 AM, John Cowan wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Betty Harvey <harvey@eccnet.com> wrote:
>> I would love to see a 'standard' graphical representation of an XML model. 
> Again, and so say we all.

In trying to teach [about] XML, I think we all tend at some stage to
have used the tree as a reference, which is a pity, because the
classical "family-tree" diagram of XML is upside down: really more of a
root-system.

Near&Far did at least present its diagram sideways, but I think that may
have been because it's more usual to have XML documents with greater
width (siblings, represented vertically) than depth (descendants,
represented horizontally). If you have to start adding non-element
nodes, the whole tree-metaphor becomes unreadably dense.

How are most of the people we want to present a graphical model to
at understanding different-shaped boxes joined by lines anyway?

///Peter