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

Re: Data design methods? (was Re: APIs, messaging)

  • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@h...>
  • To: xml-dev@l...
  • Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 00:35:48 -0400

database design methods
[Michael Champion]
>
>
> I have an even more basic question: by what criteria does one choose
between
> different DATA designs?  OO methodologies provide criteria for choosing
between
> different designs, but as we've brought out here, a good OO design *hides*
data
> structures.  Are there widely accepted criteria for defining "good" data
models
> independently of the algorithms used to process them?
>
> The only thing that comes to mind that would be relevant to XML is
> Entity-Relationship Modelling.  Any thoughts?
>
Several.  Remember that in the (relational, at least) world, we have logical
and physical (and maybe conceptual too) data models.  The logical data model
lets you describe clearly the essential structure of the data, and the
physical data model lets you screw around with it to get performance or
other desirable runtime properties.  This separation is practically
essential to good database design, especially for a complicated database.
What plays an analogous role in xml data model approaches?  In xml data
modeling, people tend to dive right in with instances and physical schemas.
Maybe this isn't the best approach.

For databases, we have the good old CRUD analysis (Create, Replace, Update,
Delete).  For each entity, indeed each data item, you want to have such an
analysis.  It could be considered a design metric.

For databases, we have the relational integrity rules for each foreign key
relationship between entities (that is, "ON DELETE CASCADE", etc.).

For relational databases, we have various degrees of normalization and we
know that the logical data model should be in at least 3rd normal form.
That's another metric.  Normal forms are about making different data items
and structures orthogonal to each other and about reducing redundancy.  It
would be interesting and valuable to look at xml data structures to find out
how to achieve comparable goals.

Another design consideration - there could be a design pattern for this
one - is whether to make an entity dependent or independent.  Independent
entities are more suited to model as objects, but you can't always make them
independent.  The "intertwinkle" table (to use Mike Gorman's lovely term)
that you use for a many-to-many relationship is an example.

All these things (and more, including coherence) go into making a good ER
data model.  They are all independent of the processing algorithms.

Cheers,

Tom P


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

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.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
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.