W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms@w3.org > March 2002

RE: Hierarchy etc.

From: Mike Just <Mike.Just@entrust.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 09:03:24 -0500
Message-ID: <9A4F653B0A375841AC75A8D17712B9C90257A920@sottmxs04.entrust.com>
To: "'Hallam-Baker, Phillip'" <pbaker@verisign.com>, "'www-xkms@w3.org'" <www-xkms@w3.org>
Although I see the advantage of using the abstract types (it's easier to
identify related elements; also makes for a shorter schema doc), I find the
flat structure much easier to read and analyze. 

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip [mailto:pbaker@verisign.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 12:16 PM
To: www-xkms@w3.org
Subject: Hierarchy etc.


All,

	How do people think we should organize the schema?

One option is the current 'flat' datastructure in which LocateRequest and
ValidateRequest are both top level types

A second option is to adopt the use of abstract types etc in the manner of
SAML and introduce a RequestAbstractType that is extended by
LocateRequesttype and ValidateRequestType

	Phill

Phillip Hallam-Baker FBCS C.Eng.
Principal Scientist
VeriSign Inc.
pbaker@verisign.com
781 245 6996 x227
 
Received on Wednesday, 6 March 2002 09:03:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:31:38 UTC