Re: Modeling Data for XML instead of SQL-DBMS

mAsterdam wrote:
> <Annotations>
>
> dawn wrote:
> > If working on a software project where all data are persisted
> /persisted/
>
> Ah, we are talking software development on an island, not
> about shared data.
>
> > in XML
>
> Ah, we are talking about documents, not about data.
>
> > documents and not in an SQL-DBMS, the tools would not require that the
> > data model be in 1NF or the use of the SQL NULL.
>
> /data model/
> ?? document model! - ok, no 1NF.
> /NULL/ (sigh of relief) - not about NULL.
>
> > How would an excellent logical data model designed for this XML
> /logical data model for XML/
> No such thing.
>
> > implementation differ from the corresponding data model developed for
> > an SQL-DBMS?
>
> /corresponding/
> No real correspondence. The next (XML, but it doesn't matter)
> document created by dumping a database
> may differ from the previous, even if the (SQL, but it doesn't matter)
> database content stayed the same.
> Arbitrary order would have to be added to prevent this.
>
> > What would be some best practices for modeling data in
> > this environment?
>
> /this environment/
> A marketing environment? Fantasy island?
>
> </Annotations>
>
> > I'm guessing some will think that the exact same logical data model
> > would be appropriate for both targets, but hopefully many will agree
> > that it is unlikely that the best implemented data model would be
> > identical in each environment. In that case, what would the
> > differences be? What best practices would apply to data modeling for
> > XML documents compared to data modeling for a SQL-DBMS?
>
> Can't really answer that except "You don't".
> The question by it self shows to much wrongs.
Received on Tue Oct 31 2006 - 03:24:22 CET