Re: OTA Tag name rules

[Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>]

Sam Hunting wrote:
> 
> > Prefixes will use a period (.) as a separator.
> 
> Are there advocates for this practice on ebXML?
> 
> > Example: <v1.Cust.Pay.CreditCard>

Yech! Putting the version in the tag name seems to me to
be a colossal mistake. I could see adding a version attribute
to each element (possibly) but having different tag names
would necessarily require code modifications if in nothing
other than XSLT stylesheets. Not a good idea, IMHO. I certainly
would hope that ebXML would NOT adopt this practice or standard!

> > 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?

Good question! 

> 
>     (2) Why can't the "context or hierarchy" be expressed in DTDs as opposed
> to schemas?

Good question

> 
>     (3) Why put the "context or hierarchy" in the element names?

Yes, indeed! What ever for!

> 
> Thanks in advance.

-- 
    _/_/_/_/ _/    _/ _/    _/ Christopher Ferris - Enterprise Architect
   _/       _/    _/ _/_/  _/  Phone: 781-442-3063 or x23063
  _/_/_/_/ _/    _/ _/ _/ _/   Email: chris.ferris@East.Sun.COM
       _/ _/    _/ _/  _/_/    Sun Microsystems,  Mailstop: UBUR03-313
_/_/_/_/  _/_/_/  _/    _/     1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803-0903