- From: vze3y7w8 <boris.kortiak@verizon.net>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 06:21:15 -0400
- To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <002c01c27c10$40ab6310$33fc5044@VAIO590G01>
I realize the subject is a bit nebulous, but bear with me. I am coming from the world of a COBOL suit (20+ years) where I am used to different name for the various things in the XML world. I am trying to create a mental map to fit (or perhaps cram) my COBOL concepts onto XML. The first mapping I am making is of FD (File Definitions) onto XSD. As I see it, the XSD is functionally equivalent to the FD in that it defines the structure of the information contained in the XML document. It enhances the FD concept in that it encapsulates some validation and restriction rules that are not available in COBOL (In COBOL I am limited to three basic data types: Numeric, Alphanumeric and Alphabetic). Now my question comes in at converting a simple COBOL application to using the XML tools. Let us say I have a program that prints a purchase order (PO). The PO is actually made up of two files: header and detail. The header file contains information common to all of the detail lines for a PO, while the detail file contains the variable details. PO Header (in XML) <PurchaseOrderHeader> <POH> <PO_number>1</PO_number> <PO_source>General Supply</PO_source> <PO_duedate>2002-12-22</PO_duedate> </POH> </PurchaseOrderHeader> <PurchaseOrderDetails> <POD> <PO_number>1</PO_number> <PO_line>1</PO_line> <PO_item>Widget</PO_item> <PO_quantity>1</PO_quantity> <PO_price>12.23</PO_price> </POD> <POD> <PO_number>1</PO_number> <PO_line>2</PO_line> <PO_item>Gadget</PO_item> <PO_quantity>12</PO_quantity> <PO_price>11.34</PO_price> </POD> </PurchaseOrderDetails> Each of these, in COBOL, is a separate file. These files are related to each other by <PO_number/>. Is there a best practice for defining the XSD for each of these documents to make the relationship as easy to use as possible, keeping in mind that something like XSL will be used to transform the documents into a printable form? How are one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-one and many-to-many relationships best dealt with? -- boris@kortiak.com <http://www.boriskortiak.com/> http://www.boriskortiak.com/
Received on Friday, 25 October 2002 06:21:41 UTC