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

Re: meta-specs (was RE: A few things I noticed about w3c's xml-sc hema)

• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@h...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:25:20 -0400

[Bullard, Claude L (Len]

> I'm wondering if for some projects, it isn't also
> the best way to start.  In other words, should
> one create a UML-like design if what is being
> designed is NOT an OOP, but simply the data
> exchanged?

You're getting dangerously close to my favorite design approach - which
really starts with requirements elicitation - namely, Ian Graham's SOMA
method(ology).  He advocates considering the system as interacting with
people (or other computer systems) via a series of (abstract) messages.  The
messages convey some data and a request, the return provides data or
confirmation or whatever.  It is the responsibility of various tasks to
accomplish the golas of the messages.

These tasks may - or may not - end up getting implemented by some set of
objects in the O-O sense.

This could tie in to your earlier post in that a person asks the system for
certain data (reports) - that might when generalized become  a requirement.

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: meta-specs (was RE: A few things I noticed about w3c's xml-sc hema)
    • From: Francis Norton <francis@r...>

• References:
  • RE: meta-specs (was RE: A few things I noticed about w3c's xml-sc hema)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: meta-specs (was RE: A few things I noticed about w3c's xml-schema)
• Next by Date: RE: meta-specs
• Previous by thread: RE: meta-specs (was RE: A few things I noticed about w3c's xml-sc hema)
• Next by thread: Re: meta-specs (was RE: A few things I noticed about w3c's xml-sc hema)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread