[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Request for a poll: (was RE: Datatypes vs anarchy)

• From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:59:18 +0800

From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@A...>

>Note that the model, in this case, describes the application-level data
that
>is the ultimate goal; it is not a schema for the inbound XML. The input
>rules, in this implementation, also serve as a lightweight schema for the
>XML. I know this is different from what you had in mind, but I think I see
>parallels.

This is like the XForms approach too.  Of course, there is all sorts of
layering and unlayering that we can do. In the XForms approach the "model"
really is the schema for the document transfer, so it is not a conceptual
model directly (unless the equivalent conceptual model actually would form a
tree, in which case it is a conceptual model :-).

Cheers
Rick

• Prev by Date: Re: Novice. Pointers please!
• Next by Date: Re: Mapping a UML model to a DTD or Schema
• Previous by thread: RE: Request for a poll: (was RE: Datatypes vs anarchy)
• Next by thread: patient info schema
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread