[sdo] ISSUE 133: New proposal

["Radu Preotiuc-Pietro" <radu.preotiuc-pietro@ORACLE.COM>]

Hello everyone,

As discussed in last week's call, I put together a simple proposal regarding moving some of the text from the SDO 2.1.1's chapter 4 to chapter 9.

Proposal:
Insert a new section in chapter 9, 9.2.2 (7.2.2 in the SDO 3 draft):

7.2.2 XSD, SDO, and Source Code Names
In most cases, the names in XSD, SDO, and the source code are identical.  

When they are not identical, an annotated XSD declares the SDO names. The names in SDO and the implementation language are identical. The following are the naming rules.
1.	All SDO Type names in a URI and all Property names in Type.getProperties() must be unique and non-null.
2.	SDO does not specify name any mangling but enables and sometimes requires name overrides with sdo:name
3.	If an XSD declaration would result in a duplicate name, sdo:name must be specified in the XSD file.
4.	If an XSD type definition has no name, its name is the same as the next named enclosing declaration. If that is a duplicate then sdo:name must be used.
5.    Implementations may provide behavior (in a product-specific fashion) equivalent to annotations to automatically solve such problems as duplicate names.  This is logically equivalent to the implementation creating an Annotated Schema (AS) and then creating SDO metadata from the Annotated Schema. An implementation that provides this behavior should also provide a means to generate the AS. The generated AS should be annotated so that another implementation can define SDO Types and Properties from the generated schema without further name mangling. Having such an annotated schema ensures portability of Types and Properties (and generated code) across all implementations.

Thanks,
Radu