RE: [ubl-dev] Re: Global elements doing UBL a disservice

["David RR Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

Chin,
 
I'd say it was the other way around - SQL tables and columns are a very
simple constrained static information model - hence XSD can handle
those quiet well.

I believe we are seeing a world emerge where people are wanting to move
beyond those restrictions imposed by SQL.

Remember too that Codd originally wanted to have extended usage
semantics on columns within tables - but had to remove those features
so that the computers of that era could perform OK.  Notice that this
simple "DBase2" style data modelling has served very well.  However -
clearly companies can gain competitive advantage by adopting XML based
information handling - as we see with examples such as the Oxford
Press, through to Amazon, eBay, Dell and HP to mention just some.

DW

 -------- Original Message --------
Sure, I suppose the whole 3-4 year of UBL activities were to "upgrade"
the world's EDI from EDIFACT to an XML-based version that offers
<xsd:import source="advantages.xml">  advantages, it is to describe
using XML the abstract value space formerly described by EDIFACT using
ASCII strings.  Why did, and when have, the structures of the datasets
become suddenly so complicated that XSD that can describe SQL database
schemas cannot now describe them?  I don't really know, and I don't
suspect that change had happened.