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

Re: Designing XML to Support Information Evolution

owl examples
Title: Message
Hi Roger,
I agree with many of the comments put forth so far, but I have a question: In what order did you learn these lessons (no pun intended). It sounded like you learned that order hurts after you had already flattened the structure. So I wonder if the question of processing overhead associated with hierarchal structure was actually an artifact of order not being important? It seems that another lesson that might be learned is that moving nodes around in a hierarchal structure is not so easy in XSLT-- of course DOM (where size allows) is a much better option for that kind of processing.
When Thomas mentioned dependency I started thinking about the picker's dependence on the parent tract (in the original model). The amount of grapes that the picker could pick clearly is dependent upon the amount of ripe grapes in the parent tract and number of active sibling pickers. Here the hierarchy does a good job of grouping where that is maybe more difficult in the flat version.
I was also making guesses about "moving" a picker from one tract to another. I wondered if the picker was known a priori (i.e., looking for a job) or if the tract simply wanted any available picker. If the tract wanted a specific picker (the tract owner's son for instance) then in the real world someone (the application) would have to go and check each tract until they found him-- this again seems like the hierarchal model more adequately represents the real world-- while we can all recognize that simply looping through all of the pickers would be quicker.
This brings me to my next question(s): were the "problems" speed oriented or only difficulty oriented? Other than number of lines, what specifically made it difficult? What did all of those lines contain?
Finally, and as an aside, why didn't you choose to use RDF in the flat model. It seems supremely suited to it. Additionally you could add in various OWL relationships to create new kinds of pickers that can only pick certain kinds of grapes, etc. This is a Semantic Web example waiting to happen. In fact the OWL examples already surround this area [1].
It is a very interesting example : )
[1] http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/projects/wine/explanation.html#ontology
Jeff Rafter


Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
First Name
Last Name
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.

Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.