RE: Effective XML
> -----Original Message----- > From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@i...] > Sent: 02 January 2002 22:19 > To: Michael Brennan; 'Leigh Dodds'; xml-dev > Subject: RE: Effective XML > [...] > Is it better to use a namespace or to copy an element type > or attribute type definition into a new schema? IOW, by > what criteria should one choose between a namespace reference > and a clone? > > Maintenance is obvious but not a problem. I would suggest > that it is cheaper to copy if the overlap among several > schema is small (just a few common element and attribute > types). I'd agree with this. I'd guess that the most common example at the moment of use by reference is to include XHTML elements where one needs to include markup text (e.g. product descriptions) within another vocabulary. The overlaps might not be just be defined in terms of numbers of elements/attributes, but also whether the 'concept' (for want of a better term) that is being marked up is a natural subset of the existing schema. For the XHTML example, this is paragraphs of text. Another way to consider this and a potential advantage of this kind of modularity is that these document fragments in another namespace can be handed off to other components in a pipeline. E.g. an HTML renderer. Reuse of existing markup definitions allows reuse of these components, or where these don't exist, provide a means of specifying a standard input for a new component. Copying references increases the size of the interface to such components or requires adapters. Cheers, L.
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format