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

RE: Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is

• To: "XML Developers List" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is
• Subject: RE: Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is better" ?
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <rjelliffe@a...>
• Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 14:39:39 +1000 (EST)
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <827BC324B431954A855DC4E39E71B02874BDF0@I...>
• References: <827BC324B431954A855DC4E39E71B02874BDF0@I...>
• User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.2

Hi all: I am back on deck as of next week and well.


Costello, Roger L. said:

> Hypothesis - How to Design XML Documents
>
> I am supremely compelled by the argument that the future is much too
> uncertain to bother attempting to anticipate or design for.  Thus I put
> this down as the first part of this hypothesis:
>
>     Part 1: Design your XML documents so that they are well-suited for
> processing by your applications *today*.
>
> In other words, how your data is going to be processed tells you how to
> design your XML.
>
> A large percentage (majority?) of applications today operate on the
> data only after it is placed into a (relational) database.  A smaller
> percentage (minority?) of applications operate directly on the data in
> an XML document.  So, as an 80-20 rule I make the second part of this
> hypothesis:
>
>     Part 2: Design your XML to be flat, with direct mappings from XML
> to (relational) database tables.
>
> I am also supremely compelled by the argument to keep the markup (tags)
> to a minimum.  So here's the third part of this hypothesis:
>
>     Part 3: Eliminate nonessential markup (tags).  Only use tags that
> are actually used by your applications *today*.
>
> To recap - when designing XML:
>                          - be practical;
>                          - be simple;
>                          - don't use unnecessary tags;
>                          - design your XML to work well with your
> applications *today*;
>                          - most likely, "flatter is better".
>
> Comments?  /Roger

• Prev by Date: Re: Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is better" ?
• Next by Date: RE: Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is
• Previous by thread: Re: Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is better" ?
• Next by thread: RE: Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread