[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Namespace and Versioning
Because the application types keep changing both in time and location. One URI won't do it. I have to know the version. We are not the only ones changing the schema. The police databases, for example, have interesting problems not dissimilar to others but a little exagerated: 1. There is only one standard for the information, NIBRS, and it is Federal. 2. Each agency gets to futz with it by say, city and by state. Actually, the state may clean it up on the way to the FBI but below that, it is agency specific. 3. And just as an aside, simple validation is not good enough. Why? Well, it is one of the few database apps where trying to put false information into it is not only a sport, but a survival tactic for the databasees. Lieing is not only possible, but expected (AKA tracking, driver's who lie about the vehicle owner, etc). The entity relationships are pure hell. So we have several versioning issues some of which we handle in the local database using lookups (agency stuff), and some of which we have to handle by versioning the base schemas. Yes, it can be done with a URI but only if the URI has version number on the end of it. Not complex, but I think necessary. My only reason for citing SOAP originally was that I had a sample in front of me. The issue is really for schemas that are quickly evolving but are all of which (major/minor changes) are still in use. We say we sell COTS but that is wishful thinking. Are you saying, the URI is used but then the system negotiates for the version? As for names, there is that thing about having power over that which can be named. On the other hand, it hasn't worked on my wife yet and is slipping quickly with my kids. Classic three body problem... :-) Len Bullard Intergraph Public Safety clbullar@i... http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen [mailto:frystyk@m...] Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 2:54 PM To: Bullard, Claude L (Len); xml-dev@l... Subject: RE: Namespace and Versioning > Ok for messaging and again, for central standards shared > across the uberSystem. Probably not so > good for database management of applications hosted on that system. Why isn't it an advantage to have a single URI instead of a (URI, version-number) tuple for the envelope as well as for any "application" which can live within a SOAP message? > This is a juicy topic for those who like distributed chaos > and systems > that run best on the edge of turbulence. Naming is always juicy, no? Henrik
|
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
|