Re: ISSUE-10: Mapping Element and Type names

Original Message From: <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>

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

>From my perspective I'd definitely welcome any input on how this can best be 
done.

However, my question is, if a single click solution can't be proposed, 
should the document be silent and the matter or provide guidance to schema 
developers?

Perhaps guidance can be provided to tool developers, that schema developers 
could infer there is a set of compromises they can take!  Something along 
the lines of "Tools should ensure that all XML names can be mapped to 
equivalent names in the target programming language.  Where it is not 
possible to conveniently provide an automated mapping (perhaps because the 
target programming language character set is only a subset of the XML names 
character set), tools should provide additional means that allow users to 
configure the mapping between the XML names and the target programming 
language names, perhaps on a instance-by-instance basis.  The precise method 
used is out-of-scope of this document."

Pete.
--
=============================================
Pete Cordell
Tech-Know-Ware Ltd
                         for XML to C++ data binding visit
                         http://www.tech-know-ware.com/lmx
                         (or http://www.xml2cpp.com)
=============================================

Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 09:30:29 UTC