[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

• To: <davep@d...>, "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
• Subject: RE: A bunch of components, but no mandated organization- reasonable?
• From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>
• Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:11:22 -0500
• Cc: "XML Developers List" <xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcT5otvduVnRIR3XSDKvTsoblGvXmwAAErNQ
• Thread-topic: A bunch of components, but no mandated organization- reasonable?

> -----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>
> 
> 

• Prev by Date: RE: A bunch of components, but no mandated organization- reasonable?
• Next by Date: RE: A bunch of components, but no mandated organization- reasonable?
• Previous by thread: XML enabled SVN or CVS?
• Next by thread: RE: A bunch of components, but no mandated organization- reasonable?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread