FpML-AWG-Legacy Fwd: [fpml-arch-modelling-wg] Re: Critical issues for product WG

["Danielle Cauthen" <dcauthen@xxxxxxxx>]

--- In fpml-arch-modelling-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Robert Silver"
<robert.e.silver@...> wrote:

Comment on Instances; Classes and double naming ...

Is this one single issue, or are there separate parts of the problem?

>From an XML standpoint, even if I did not care about classes vs.
instances, there are cases for nesting.  For example:

<myOwn>
	<thing>ABC</thing>
	<stuff>Yes</stuff>
	<other>NNN</other>
</myOwn>

<your>
	<thing>7.5</thing>
	<stuff>No</stuff>
	<other>NNN</other>
</your>

versus

	<myOwnThing>ABC</myOwnThing>
	<myOwnStuff>Yes</myOwnStuff>
	<myOwnOther>NNN</myOwnOther>

	<yourThingy>7.5</yourThing>
	<yourStuff>No</yourStuff>
	<yourOther>NNN</yourOther>

1) The flattened version has more characters
2) thing, stuff, and other are re-used with different names

-----

In contrast, constructs such as:

a) fxos:optionMaturity   containing fxos:OptionMaturity                
  
b) mdr:terms             containing mdr:Term
c) pty:settlementContact containing a:Contact

Any single tag that can contain one (or more) copies of a single tag
that in turn contains data -- conveys little, if any, information.
Ignoring if the tag should be upper or lower case, removing the first
tag for b; the second tag for c) and either tab for a -- conveys the
same information to a person looking at the XML.

----

Can one make a case for keeping the first set of nesting, but
eliminating the second set of nesting?

--- End forwarded message ---



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe: Email majordomo@xxxxxxxx with a blank subject line
In the body include the line: unsubscribe awglegacy youremail@address
To view archives: http://www.fpml.org/_wgmail/_awglegacymail/threads.html