[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Re: RDDL -- How would you design it?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Clark C . Evans" <cce@c...> To: "The Deviants" <xml-dev@l...> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 8:29 PM Subject: Re: RDDL -- How would you design it? > I started a converstation with Nicholas off line, and he > suggested we continue it on xml-dev. > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 07:02:28PM +0100, Nicolas LEHUEN wrote: > | Today, each kind of meta-data resource has its own way of binding itself to > | a document : stylesheets use <?xml-stylesheet PIs, DTDs use the DOCTYPE > | declaration, XML Schemas use attributes from a special namespace, etc. etc. > | This result in documents that are overloaded with resource linking > | directives, document types that are not easy to maintain (if I want to add a > | schema in a new language, I have to modify all documents instance since > | there is no central directory to add the resource to), and severe > | restrictions in meta-data discovery, because I have to know all potential > | meta-data types to follow the linking method, PI names or attributes names > | that they decided to implement... > | > | A standardized way of linking a document to a document-type specific > | resource catalog would solve this problem. That's what I'd like to design > | with other people. But this needs to agree on what is a document-type, to > | begin with. > | > | http://nicolas.lehuen.com/Articles/Programming/XML/fog0000000033.html > > Ok. Here is a simple "model" for resources as a straw-man. > > --- > Document: > This is a serialized entity. > > Class: > This is a collection of documents which are > somehow related. A concrete implementation > of a class could be a namespace URI; but > not all namespace URIs are classes. Wow. I was shyly trying to write about types and Simon was already upset, but you go directly for 'class' :). No pb with your definition, otherwise. > Resource: > This is a Document which contains information > related to a Class. Since the Resource is > a document, it may belong to a Class. > > Examples of Resouce Classes include, but are > not limited to... (a) schema to validate Documents > beloning to the Class, (b) transforms from documents > in the related Class to another Class, (c) human-readable > texts, such as an HTML document. I would use a more specific term like meta-data resources or any better term you can find. Resource is already used to describe something that a URI can be resolved into. But once again, no problem for your definition. > Authority: > This is an undefined object which is vouches for > the autenticity of a Resource. I didn't thought of that : ensuring the authenticity of meta-data. That's a good idea, but why extend it to the more general problem of ensuring the authenticity of any resource (XML document, meta-data, binary files, etc.) and let someone else work on it ? > Bundle: > This is a tuple of (a) Authrority, and (b) a list > of zero or more Resources. > > Directory: > This is a collection of Bundles. > > --- > > Questions for the model... > > a. Can a Document belong to more than one Class? > > b. Can a Bundle have Resources from more than > one Class? If so, is Directory redundant? > > c. Can a Class have more than one Bundles? > > d. Are authorities attached to Resources or Bundles? > Are Authrorities even necessary? > > Questions for an XML version of the model... > > 1. Are Classes namespace URIs? Are all URIs a Class? > > 2. If URIs are classes, is the document's Class the > namespace of the root element? Is it's collection > of classes (if A is yes) the collection of namespaces > within a XML document? > > --- > > A few requirements that come to mind: > > A. It should be easy to get from a Document to > the resource Bundle(s) associated with > the document. > > B. It should be flexible so that any Authority can > associate a Resource with a Class. > > etc. > > > Anyway.. this is just a simple "first-pass" and I'm sure > it lacks many of the concerns necessary; but with some luck > it could be a bootstrap for a nice requirements discussion > on this topic? RDDL is nice, but it seems that it is lacking > in more than one facet; so perhaps we could work out a model > and requirement set first and then see how RDDL does. If > RDDL does well and can be expanded... great. If not, then > perhaps we should look towards another solution that meets > the requirements? > > Clark Thanks for your input :). Regards, Nicolas > -- > Clark C. Evans Axista, Inc. > http://www.axista.com 800.926.5525 > XCOLLA Collaborative Project Management Software > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> > >
|
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
|