W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > August 2007

Re: When to make a new vocabulary...

From: Boris Kolpackov <boris@codesynthesis.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 20:13:41 +0200
To: "Fortuno, Adam" <Adam.Fortuno@Metavante.com>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Message-ID: <20070810181341.GB25720@karelia>

Hi Adam,

Fortuno, Adam <Adam.Fortuno@Metavante.com> writes:

> Consumer lending is different enough from mortgage lending that I would
> prefer to develop a new vocabulary to handle it. However, other believe
> strongly we should modify the existing schema.

I would say create a new vocabulary. If the two have a substantial
sub-vocabulary in common, factor it out into a base vocabulary (e.g,
call it basic-lending) and reuse it in both consumer-lending and
mortgage-lending.

BTW, this problem is pretty similar to the OO problem of creating two
separate classes vs lumping two relatively unrelated functionalities
into one class. I believe the consensus in OO is to create two classes
with a common base if necessary.


HTH,
Boris

-- 
Boris Kolpackov
Code Synthesis Tools CC
http://www.codesynthesis.com
Open-Source, Cross-Platform C++ XML Data Binding
Received on Friday, 10 August 2007 18:16:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:15:00 GMT