RE: [BULK] Re: Data Modeling

I've had limited success modeling ours in UML with ArgoUML and this 
profile:

http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/08/07/wxs_uml.html

I wrote a hideous XSLT stylesheet to translate the ArgoUML XMI to XML 
Schema XSDL.

I've discovered that the diagrams can get quite messy if one has many 
optional elements.

Andy




"Fortuno, Adam" <Adam.Fortuno@Metavante.com> 
Sent by: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
09/17/2007 08:12 AM

To
"Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com>
cc
<xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Subject
RE: [BULK]  Re: Data Modeling







Pete,

I was looking for a graphical diagramming method.

I understand what you're saying. Thanks none the less!

A- 

-----Original Message-----
From: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org [mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Pete Cordell
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 9:08 AM
To: Fortuno, Adam; xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Subject: [BULK] Re: Data Modeling
Importance: Low


Are you looking for things like XML Schema, Relax-NG, Schematron and so
on? 
Or are you looking for graphical methods?

If the latter, I'm not aware of any formal methods, but a number of
tools do represent schemas using graphical methods. However, in my
experience, in most cases the graphical representations only capture a
fraction of the information you need, and while sufficient for a screen
based representation with which you can click to get more information,
they probably don't translate well into paper based representations.

HTH,

Pete.
=============================================
Pete Cordell
Codalogic
for XML Schema to C++ data binding visit
 http://codalogic.com/lmx/
=============================================
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fortuno, Adam" <Adam.Fortuno@Metavante.com>
To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 3:53 PM
Subject: Data Modeling



All,

Is there a popular notation for modeling a vocabulary? I'm accustom to
ERD's for database data modeling. I tend to use that for data modeling
XML vocabularies, but I want to know if there is a better way to do
this.

A-

Received on Monday, 17 September 2007 16:41:47 UTC