[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: A bunch of components, but no mandated organization- reaso
> -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Pawson [mailto:davep@d...] > Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 2:02 PM > To: Roger L. Costello > Cc: 'XML Developers List' > Subject: RE: A bunch of components, but no mandated > organization- reasonable? > > On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 14:40 -0500, Roger L. Costello wrote: > > >I assume that this question has as its impetus ... > > > > Here's my motivation for the question: in a large, complex > Enterprise > > you may know the kinds of "things" that need to be moved > around (e.g., > > Book, BookCover, etc) but you don't have a-priori knowledge of the > > specific transactions that will be needed. > > > > So, is it feasible to simply declare a bunch of components (that > > everyone understands), which may be dynamically assembled by one > > system and shipped to another system where the assembly is > dynamically understood. > > > Being naive, I / we, thought that's what namespaces were all > about some time ago. Even if namespaces could help in this case by associating components, I believe one would still need to tackle the dynamic assembly piece, which I believe is the toughest piece. Kind Regards, Joseph Chiusano Booz Allen Hamilton Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World > I 'see' (find in my inbox, whatever) 5 things (namespaced integrated > instances) in > one document. Rogers scenario. I'm assuming James C and > friends haven't got DSDL into plain English by 'now'. > > > The n'th one is using the xyz namespace (call it docbook for > realisms sake). So, off I go to docbook.org, and find that > there is this thing called docbook, and Norm and friends > understand it, so I hook into his understanding of docbook, > and add that to Rogers mix. > > That was the theory. > > The practise? Durned things called people get in the way. > As MK so cynically puts it. > "We all so nicely misunderstand it", which is probably too > close to the truth. > > 1. The W3C tell me I can't disambiguate a namespace by > de-referencing it. Shuuugar. > 2. When I find docbook, Norm (being rotten like he is) > doesn't tell me what semantic interpretation he puts on these > elements..... in a way that moves over the Atlantic | pond > with clarity. > 3. I try these moves... get confused, and give up. > > > So no Roger. I'm sulking by now, or confused (if I'm a machine). > > > Sigh. > > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > > Dave Pawson > XSLT + Docbook FAQ > http://www.dpawson.co.uk > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > 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://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php> > >
|
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
|