W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > January 2006

Re: ISSUE-10: Mapping Element and Type names

From: <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:56:52 -0800
To: petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com
Cc: paul.downey@bt.com, public-xsd-databinding@w3.org
Message-Id: <OFD9D67E74.B5AFBCC7-ON882570FB.0077689E-882570FB.00789083@KP.ORG>

> I agree with the requirement that tools should support all mappings. I'm 

> just slightly worried that there's an issue of what can be done vs. what 
> easily be done.  For example, a tool could map Chinese characters to 
> Unicode number (e.g. Type_U1234_U6543), but a Chinese developer might 
> that they prefer to use ASCII XML names in preference to this.

Another option for CJK languages is to map Kanji and Hiragana to Romaji. I 
don't speak any CJK languages but I'm pretty sure that that mapping is NOT 
automatable (I'd be happy to learn otherwise); however, tool vendors could 
certainly provide mapping annotations to make it easier for the schema 
author to help the tool perform the mapping.  Granted this approach 
wouldn't necessarily apply to greek, arabic, thai or other languages but 
there's a seed of a solution in there, isn't there?

> For example, it could advise that not all XML names are 
> directly representatable in some programming languages (such as C/C++, 
> etc), and as a result the automatically mapped names may be 
> or additional manual configuartion may be required if names are not 
> with with these limitations in mind.

As I mentioned in my previous message...I think one of the main purposes 
of this WG is to to provide guidence to the databinding tool builders 
about how to better support what schema authors "in the wild" are doing 
(at least that's why my organization joined!) and not to advise schema 
authors to limit themselves to what existing tools support.

Received on Thursday, 19 January 2006 21:57:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:12 UTC