[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Core Component Analysis - SWIFT's Comments
William - thanks for your comments. FYI -I have seen in places - not so far from here :-) tag names of 50-60 characters i.e with end tag 100-120 chars and a data 'payload' of 10 chars. - I know bandwidth is larger now but ........... f only 'techies' need to look at the tags why not used coded tags - a lot of us can still read EDIFACT messages Phil Goatly ----- Original Message ----- From: "William J. Kammerer" <wkammerer@foresightcorp.com> To: "ebXML Core" <ebxml-core@lists.ebxml.org> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 2:23 AM Subject: Re: Core Component Analysis - SWIFT's Comments > Upon being presented with Steve Tompkins' examples of labeled tags used > in XML based SWIFT messaging, Philip Goatly has gently reminded us that > "not every user of ebXML will have English as their mother tongue - in > fact - this may surprise you - a great number of people in the world do > not even understand English." > > Yes, this is one more example of the overarching arrogance and > tendency towards imperialism that we Americans notice in our cultural > cousins, the English. We are, quite frankly, embarrassed for them. > Thanks for the reminder, Phil. > > But, as discussed much before, the tags are most likely to be read only > by programmer types, all of whom read English, at least if they're any > good. So that's not as big a problem as it seems at first. And if the > tags are built up in semantic units from a dictionary, like the ISO BSR > (Basic Semantic Register), then there are just a relatively few words > being used. That's not so bad, is it? The BSR even includes > translations for the Semantic Components' definitions in French and > German. > > Speaking of the BSR: is any use of it going to be made in the names for > core components and/or InformationEntityUseNames? There seems to be > some sort of bias against the BSR evident in certain circles, but I > notice that Hartmut Hermes has a reference to the BSR in his signature - > so it can't be all dead, yet. > > I think Phil is also uncomfortable with the notion of big, long tag > names built up from semantic units - like those suggested by SWIFT's > Jacques Littré: BirthDate, DeathDate, and IncorporationDate. He'd > probably have the same objection to using BSR semantic units as tags: > AccountsPayables.Contact.Person.Name, Approval.DateAndTime or > Consignee.Location.City.Name. But the intent of these techniques based > on ISO 11179 is to give us decomposable names - the same purpose served > by EDIFACT qualifiers. In actuality, any one set of instances of a > particular business message employed in some vertical may only use a > small subset of qualifiers (or components of the Information Entity > name) - there's only so many different types of parties relevant to > Phil's specialty of international trade. Hence, the number of derived > tag names would be fairly finite once you press the button to convert a > UML data model into an XML schema. > > Phil wonders "[who] would consider making each country a separate class? > or even worse, who would make each UN-Location Code (UN-LOCODE) of which > there are 30,000 a separate class?" Actually, no one. These codes > serve, in Bob Miller's term, a "reference" service - as opposed to the > "element alias" service provided by the semantic components discussed > above. See in RE: Units of Measure and follow-up commentary, at > http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-core/200007/msg00073.html. > > Finally, Phil asks "how are we going to deal with many to many > relationships within an XML hierarchy. I am sufficiently old/mature to > remember the problem we had with such things in Hierarchical databases > and the factors which led to Relational Databases where relationships > are made at run time. With XML we seem to be back to hierarchies which > may lead to similar difficulties." I am far too young to answer this. > I will have to yield to Bob Miller. > > William J. Kammerer > FORESIGHT Corp. > 4950 Blazer Memorial Pkwy. > Dublin, OH USA 43017-3305 > +1 614 791-1600 > > Visit FORESIGHT Corp. at http://www.foresightcorp.com/ > "Commerce for a New World" > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC