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

RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented v s acti

• To: 'Jeff Lowery' <jlowery@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented v s action-oriented
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 15:19:58 -0600

We are about to walk straight back into the Doctype over PI 
over attvalue in the root discussion.

From: Jeff Lowery [mailto:jlowery@s...]

>Perhaps more to the point is:

>Should one mix XML-formatted process descriptions with metadata? 

>In other words, have one schema for process description and another for data
>description. Do these two descriptions have to be tightly bound in the same
>document?

No they don't and any GUI-property markup design, or IDEF-like 
property definition shows one how to decouple.  The whole idea 
of MIL 87269 was to abstract the database away from the processing 
description.  We played around a lot with this in the MID design 
because of 87269.  For IETMs, it was just a matter of having an 
engine for navigation according to a *view* minus any presentation-oriented 
information such as might be found in a traditional stylesheet.  

That is why we used a design for MID 1 based on a midi sequencer 
because it enabled one to create mini-sequences that could 
then be aggregated into higher level performances, sort of 
like a Wizard maker.  It actually worked.  It isn't all that 
different from any event-driven GUI except in the ability 
to aggregate and to traverse pre/post condition systems. 
It becomes an Orchestrator/Controller much like a MIDI 
system (sends event data to any conforming processor).  It 
also meets requirements for some of the heady fractal 
thinkers out there who like to talk about stratified 
complexity and compartamentalized processes (but let's 
not go there here:  it's just abstract properties for 
windowing systems with a bit of scripting).

Any time you send XML, regardless of wrapper, you are sending 
data.  It's just an issue of the receiver/interpreter doing 
something useful with it.  If you want to have some control 
over that, make sure you read the UDDI.  Even a bulk transfer 
is conceptually Export(this.data) <--> Import(this.data).  
Data warehouse designs often depend on exactly that.

len

• Prev by Date: RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented v s action-oriented
• Next by Date: RE: SAF anyone?
• Previous by thread: RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented v s action-oriented
• Next by thread: RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented v s action-oriented
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread