Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web pe
 all is well so long as the XML communicates any break in backwards compatibility, either by changing a namespace or adding a 'mustUnderstand' flag to the new extension. A change in the semantics which breaks processing an earlier version of a document without such signals, e.g. changing price from Pounds to Euros or adding a country to an address without a sensible default is a break in compatibility and would certainly be valid concern to a lawyer! Paul -----Original Message----- From: Rick Marshall [mailto:rjm@z...] Sent: 08 June 2004 05:31 To: Thomas B. Passin Cc: XML Developer List Subject: Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 and if the schema changes, but not the xslt, and someone suffers financial loss - tax returns fail, orders lost, etc - who pays? or will this be a whole new endeavour for lawyers? do i need extra profesional indemnity to cover what happens when you change something without telling me? this thread is starting to worry me.... rick Thomas B. Passin wrote: > Henrik Martensson wrote: > >> On Sun, 2004-06-06 at 20:19, Thomas B. Passin wrote: >> >>> Better to be good at xslt! >> >> >> >> What would you have done if you had to deal with information from fifty >> different sites, and all fifty made their own, frequently incompatible, >> changes? (This is a far more common situation in my line of work than >> having to deal with only one data provider.) >> >> Writing fifty different XSLT stylesheets does not sound like a good >> solution. >> > > It sounds pretty good to me, if I don't have a way to arrange for all > of them to supply the same format. > >> I can understand your reluctance to require that the data provider >> conforms to a particular schema when you are dependent on them, instead >> of the other way around. > > > It wasn't our reluctance, but the near (or total) impossibility. But > note that in this case, unlike the second vignette I posted, we were > working to a schema, in fact, two of them - theirs and ours. The fact > that their schema itself had some technical errors that I had to > correct (and informed them about), and that it was a little out of > sync with the actual delivered format, tells me that they did not have > a complete process in place for managing quality control. And this is > not unusual. > > Here's the thing ... there is no one solution because all the cases > are different. XML has a remarkable ability to cope with so many of > these environments, which is perhaps one reason it has insinuated > itself into so many places. In a case where there is a closely > connected team, and all parties can be forced or pursuaded to use a > given schema, you may be able to achieve everybody's conformance. > > Other cases are more Walter Perry-ish, and that approach is not an > option no matter how desirable it would be. And there are all degrees > in between. > > > Cheers, > > Tom P > 
|
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
|
|||||||||
