From: Paul & Eleanor (goodhill_at_xmission.com)
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 06:45:37 CET
Received: (from mdom_at_localhost) by karto.ethz.ch (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id GAA24066 for cavexml-outgoing; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 06:41:30 +0100 Received: from mail.xmission.com (mail.xmission.com [198.60.22.22]) by karto.ethz.ch (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id GAA24062 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 06:41:29 +0100 Received: from slc842.modem.xmission.com ([166.70.6.80] helo=xmission.com) by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1) id 14QjqK-0001H1-00 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:42:08 -0700 Message-ID: <3A823281.9ABE8DA8@xmission.com> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:45:37 -0700 From: Paul & Eleanor <goodhill_at_xmission.com> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch Subject: Re: What is a shot? References: <Pine.GSO.4.05.10102071552580.12177-100000_at_cor.oz.cc.utah.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cavexml_at_karto.baug.ethz.ch Precedence: bulk Reply-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch
John Halleck wrote:
> Richard Knapp wrote:
> > <shot>
> > <from value="1"/>
> > <to value="2"/>
> > <azimuth value="22.5"/>
> > <distance value="3.3"/>
> > <inclination value="-2"/>
> > </shot>
> > The first one is an easy, one line format. The second allow for other
> > attributes to be added to each element
Certainly this nested elements in <Shot> would be the more flexible
format, since we were talking about XML after all. Extendable is a
keyword here.
The <shot> with nested elements allows someone to extend shot with
additional
elements. Its part of the XML standard to be able to do this.
Of course such extensions would have to have the cooperation of
the receiver of the data.
If you are using one of the standard inplementations, the parser will
see such extension(s), like extra tags in the shot element, read them,
but if your software is asking the XML package for only certain things
then those tags will be ignored. Seems simple enough to me.
The complex cross-sections mentioned in previous diversions come to
mind as cse in point. No I am not suggesting such things as part of
caveXML, just that the nested shot form leaves a place for such
a interesting extension, while a list of attributes provides little
room.
That particular extreme example also shows why the nested form
provides superior future flexibility. Whatever the complex
cross-sections, they all had to hang from some point or points.
If some future <crossSection> tag is inside <shot>, the names (or
some hypothetical internal id) of the To and From points need not be
repeated, because we already have the context of the shot onto which we
can hang the cross section.
Summary: Stick with the shot with nested elements form.
-Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 18:00:00 CET