- From: Bryan Rasmussen <brs@itst.dk>
- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:00:04 +0100
- To: "'MCRAWFORD@lmi.org'" <MCRAWFORD@lmi.org>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
>This <Car><CarDescription> approach is an unnecessary repetition of the >"Car" concept and appears to be what Jeni Tennison warned against >earlier in this thread. IMO this is usually caused by not properly >modeling your data before authoring the schema. >You might want to look at the UBL Naming and Design rules as a good >source of a comprehensive standards-based approach. In my experience UBL seems to be overflowing with redundancies and verbosity of pretty much this type; to be redundant is to be a special form of verbose, UBL seems to me to be verbose on other levels as well. Let us examine SellerParty in the cbc namespace under UBL 1.0 first of all SellerParty seems somewhat verbose, what does SellerParty convey that Seller misses out on? Remember the question that originally started out this thread? if it had been: how do I best convey the information that someone is the seller of an item, the examples might have all been <ItemSeller> <Item-Seller> and so forth. ( "MY God!" he exclaimed, "XML dialects as structured with XML Schema as the validation technology are a special form of German!") Within SellerParty we have various elements, some of these are references to Buyer information, such as "BuyerAssignedAccountID" which seems reasonable that we have Buyer in front of that. But then we have the following SellerAssignedAccountID, well the Seller is redundant there because we know that we are under Seller but we have it because we also have a BuyerParty that has to hold two AssignedAccountIDs, one assigned by a Seller, one by the Buyer one is under. certainly this could have been done in numerous other ways, some validatable via XML Schema, some not, but for some reason we end up with the way we have, and it seems to me that it is most often the way it ends up when XML Schema is used. I have not attempted to come up with some great theory as to why XML Schema should lead to this especial form of verbosity, I have just noted that it seems to be the case.
Received on Tuesday, 23 November 2004 15:02:52 UTC