[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: OTA Tag name rules
This happened a year ago (Namespaces where not the norm, imature, or not desired) so the details of discussion are not fresh. The issues center around the fact that the DTD name space is flat. OTA needs to have the CarRental group progress through time with increasing releases at a different pace than the Airline group. Prefixing the tag names to provide context and avoid collision is one approach to this problem. As the technology advances, some of this is being reconsidered for the next rev. I am not suggesting adopting these conventions, but these are some of the issues. Thanks, Scott Hinkelman, Senior Software Engineer XML Industry Enablement IBM e-business Standards Strategy 512-823-8097 (TL 793-8097) (Cell: 512-940-0519) email@example.com, Fax: 512-838-1074 Sam Hunting <firstname.lastname@example.org> on 09/28/2000 02:57:39 PM To: Scott Hinkelman/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, email@example.com cc: Subject: Re: OTA Tag name rules > Prefixes will use a period (.) as a separator. Are there advocates for this practice on ebXML? > Example: <v1.Cust.Pay.CreditCard> > OTA's tag naming conventions include the specification version and content > hierarchy as prefixes and, as a result, will require greater bandwidth to transmit than tags with > more cryptic codes. OTA made the decision to include this much text in the tags > so OTA could convert the data model to XML-Schema as > easily as possible. XML-Schema will not need the context or hierarchy included in the tag > names, which will reduce their size. Is there anyone on the list privy to these discussions? (1) What is the "context or hierarchy" involved that can't be expressed by more typical nested containment? (2) Why can't the "context or hierarchy" be expressed in DTDs as opposed to schemas? (3) Why put the "context or hierarchy" in the element names? Thanks in advance.
Powered by eList eXpress LLC