From: Peter MATTHEWS (matthews_at_melbpc.org.au)
Date: Fri Jul 19 2002 - 07:21:42 CEST
Return-Path: <owner-cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch> Delivered-To: cavexml-archive_at_cartography.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 371AA15929 for <cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 28) id 151CA15926; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:13 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 84DE515934 for <cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 96) id 9337C15925; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:04 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id E57A71594C for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:33:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay1.melbpc.org.au (newglider.melbpc.org.au [203.12.152.9]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id E596C15915 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:32:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.melbpc.org.au (localhost.melbpc.org.au [127.0.0.1]) by relay1.melbpc.org.au (8.12.5/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6JAGCft042047 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:16:12 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from matthews_at_melbpc.org.au) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:21:42 +1000 From: Peter MATTHEWS <matthews_at_melbpc.org.au> In-Reply-To: <3D36DE3C.8020600_at_xmission.com> Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.1.20020719150211.01d4bca0@popa.melbpc.org.au> Received: from relay1.melbpc.org.au (localhost.melbpc.org.au [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.melbpc.org.au (AvMailGate-2.0.0.6) id 42000-09913329; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:15:39 +1000 Received: from peter.melbpc.org.au (a2-32.melbpc.org.au [203.12.157.32]) by relay1.melbpc.org.au (8.12.5/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6JAFZS2041996 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:15:38 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from matthews_at_melbpc.org.au) References: <20020718115649.9CD1F8B22_at_karmail.ethz.ch> Subject: Re: Entities and fields To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 X-Sender: matthews_at_popa.melbpc.org.au X-Loop: cavexml Sender: owner-cavexml_at_karmail.ethz.ch Precedence: bulk Reply-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11
At 09:26 18-07-02 -0600, P A Hill & E V Goodall wrote:
>Richard Knapp wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 17:43:35 +1000, Peter MATTHEWS wrote:
>>
>>>This flags up that I should have included some more definitions under
>>>"Other Definitions", especially as XML's use of terms is different to ...
>>
>>>[snip]
>>
>>>Field
>>> A property of an Entity. In a database table, the fields are normally
>>> represented by
>>> the columns in the table. For example, "start date" is a field of the
>>> entity "trip",
>>Excellent. However, the definition for Field starts to explain it in
>>database terms.
>
>
>
>He has choosen Field and then drawn an analogy to 'columns'. I'd say this is
>a reasonable way to explain by example. Using a DB term he would have
>called it a column straight out :-)
>
>Do you have a better word than "field" we could use to stay away from
>attribute or element, both specifically defined in XML?
>
>Now he could explicitly say that a field may map to an element or
>an attribute of another element and not just leave it to be surmised by
>the reader.
>
>-Paul
The reason I'm keeping away from XML issues at this stage of our work is
not so much to make it implementation-neutral, but because XML introduces
unnecessary complication to the discussion at this stage.
Yes, I'm avoiding using "attribute" to avoid confusion with XML's special
meaning for this term.
And I'm avoiding using the term "element" because in XML both an entity and
a field could be expressed as an XML "element".
I have used field instead of property because it's shorter, and most people
understand its meaning. But we can easily use property if no one likes field.
In the draft definition of field I did in fact say how it would be
represented in an XML document.
Peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 31 2002 - 23:00:00 CEST