Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [xml-dbms] Package Naming

Expand Messages
  • Ronald Bourret
    ... I was thinking about org.xmldatabases (which is at least descriptive). Then you would have org.xmldatabases.domutils, org.xmldatabases.xmldbms,
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 20, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      adam flinton wrote:
      > Package naming.
      >
      > A) if org.xml-dbms is taken, what else is there? org.xd? org.dx? I quite
      > like xd myself (I know there used to be a 3 letter minimum name size but
      > many have bust that (e.g. BT)

      I was thinking about org.xmldatabases (which is at least descriptive).
      Then you would have org.xmldatabases.domutils, org.xmldatabases.xmldbms,
      org.xmldatabases.schemas, etc.

      I'd really like something like
      org.middlewarefortransferringdatabetweenxmlanddatabases, but all the
      names I can think of are only slightly shorter than this example. Ideas,
      anyone?

      > B) I reckon that if recompilation requirements are removed (i.e. using JAXP
      > / JDOM, shoving in the JDBC driver,DB url etc @ runtime) then transfer etc
      > (plus the GUI) should be moved into the main body of the code (.user?
      > .visible? .gui?) Any ideas as to the package name?

      How about this:

      The transfer engine (essentially what is currently the Transfer sample)
      and the transfer classes (XxxxToDBMS, DBMSToXxxxx) go in
      .xmldbms.transfer. The GUI and the command line interface (separate
      applications, although perhaps derived from a common base class) go in
      .xmldbms.tools.

      Note that this means that the UIs are separate from the transfer engine
      -- you can think of them as applications built on top of the transfer
      engine. This is intentional, as I expect people to use the transfer
      engine programmatically, and those people shouldn't have to deal with
      the UI code.

      --
      Ronald Bourret
      Programming, Writing, and Training
      XML, Databases, and Schemas
      http://www.rpbourret.com
    • adam flinton
      ... Is org.xmldb or org.xmldatabase taken? I suppose using the pipe symbol wouldn t be good.... ie org.xml|db ... Makes sense. ... I agree. Adam
      Message 2 of 8 , Oct 23, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        > I was thinking about org.xmldatabases (which is at least descriptive).
        > Then you would have org.xmldatabases.domutils,
        > org.xmldatabases.xmldbms,
        > org.xmldatabases.schemas, etc.
        >
        > I'd really like something like
        > org.middlewarefortransferringdatabetweenxmlanddatabases, but all the
        > names I can think of are only slightly shorter than this
        > example. Ideas,
        > anyone?
        >

        Is org.xmldb or org.xmldatabase taken?

        I suppose using the pipe symbol wouldn't be good.... ie org.xml|db


        > How about this:
        >
        > The transfer engine (essentially what is currently the
        > Transfer sample)
        > and the transfer classes (XxxxToDBMS, DBMSToXxxxx) go in
        > .xmldbms.transfer. The GUI and the command line interface (separate
        > applications, although perhaps derived from a common base class) go in
        > .xmldbms.tools.
        >

        Makes sense.

        > Note that this means that the UIs are separate from the
        > transfer engine
        > -- you can think of them as applications built on top of the transfer
        > engine. This is intentional, as I expect people to use the transfer
        > engine programmatically, and those people shouldn't have to deal with
        > the UI code.
        >

        I agree.

        Adam
      • Ronald Bourret
        ... org.xmldb is taken. org.xmldatabase is not. One reason I was thinking about org.xmldatabases (plural) is that XML-DBMS isn t really a database -- it s
        Message 3 of 8 , Oct 26, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          adam flinton wrote:
          >
          > Is org.xmldb or org.xmldatabase taken?

          org.xmldb is taken. org.xmldatabase is not.

          One reason I was thinking about org.xmldatabases (plural) is that
          XML-DBMS isn't really a database -- it's middleware, and I thought that
          the plural was better than the singular in this case.

          Here's some other ideas (I haven't checked if they're available, but
          assume they are). Any catch anyone's fancy?

          xmldbmsmiddleware.org
          xmlmiddleware.org
          datatransfer.org
          xmldatatransfer.org
          xmltransfer.org
          xmldbmstransfer.org

          --
          Ronald Bourret
          Programming, Writing, and Training
          XML, Databases, and Schemas
          http://www.rpbourret.com
        • adam flinton
          ... Hummmmm..... I agree that we don t want anyone thinking it s some sort of native XML DB.....but @ the same time we want XML & DB to be in there. I think
          Message 4 of 8 , Oct 27, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:rpbourret@...]
            > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 6:48 AM
            > To: xml-dbms@egroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [xml-dbms] Package Naming
            >
            >
            > adam flinton wrote:
            > >
            > > Is org.xmldb or org.xmldatabase taken?
            >
            > org.xmldb is taken. org.xmldatabase is not.
            >
            > One reason I was thinking about org.xmldatabases (plural) is that
            > XML-DBMS isn't really a database -- it's middleware, and I
            > thought that
            > the plural was better than the singular in this case.
            >
            > Here's some other ideas (I haven't checked if they're available, but
            > assume they are). Any catch anyone's fancy?
            >
            > xmldbmsmiddleware.org
            > xmlmiddleware.org
            > datatransfer.org
            > xmldatatransfer.org
            > xmltransfer.org
            > xmldbmstransfer.org
            >

            Hummmmm..... I agree that we don't want anyone thinking it's some sort of
            native XML DB.....but @ the same time we want XML & DB to be in there. I
            think after some reflection (most of a cup of coffee) that the names with
            transfer in it are the best as that is what's happening how about mentioning
            SQL? i.e. xmlsqltransfer.org? Of those listed I prefer xmldatatransfer.org.

            Adam
          • Ronald Bourret
            Yet another idea that occurred to me was to use xmldbms and then add a suffix. For example: xmldbms-org.org xmldbmsorg.org xmldbmssoftware.org xmldbmsjava.org
            Message 5 of 8 , Nov 2, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              Yet another idea that occurred to me was to use xmldbms and then add a
              suffix. For example:

              xmldbms-org.org
              xmldbmsorg.org
              xmldbmssoftware.org
              xmldbmsjava.org
              etc.

              Any takers?

              -- Ron

              adam flinton wrote:
              >
              > > -----Original Message-----
              > > From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:rpbourret@...]
              > > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 6:48 AM
              > > To: xml-dbms@egroups.com
              > > Subject: Re: [xml-dbms] Package Naming
              > >
              > >
              > > adam flinton wrote:
              > > >
              > > > Is org.xmldb or org.xmldatabase taken?
              > >
              > > org.xmldb is taken. org.xmldatabase is not.
              > >
              > > One reason I was thinking about org.xmldatabases (plural) is that
              > > XML-DBMS isn't really a database -- it's middleware, and I
              > > thought that
              > > the plural was better than the singular in this case.
              > >
              > > Here's some other ideas (I haven't checked if they're available, but
              > > assume they are). Any catch anyone's fancy?
              > >
              > > xmldbmsmiddleware.org
              > > xmlmiddleware.org
              > > datatransfer.org
              > > xmldatatransfer.org
              > > xmltransfer.org
              > > xmldbmstransfer.org
              > >
              >
              > Hummmmm..... I agree that we don't want anyone thinking it's some sort of
              > native XML DB.....but @ the same time we want XML & DB to be in there. I
              > think after some reflection (most of a cup of coffee) that the names with
              > transfer in it are the best as that is what's happening how about mentioning
              > SQL? i.e. xmlsqltransfer.org? Of those listed I prefer xmldatatransfer.org.
              >
              > Adam
              >
              >
              > To Post a message, send it to: xml-dbms@...
              >
              > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xml-dbms-unsubscribe@...

              --
              Ronald Bourret
              Programming, Writing, and Training
              XML, Databases, and Schemas
              http://www.rpbourret.com
            • Nick Semenov
              I would take xmldbms2.org - since we are about to jump on version 2. Let the others try to catch up. NS ... From: Ronald Bourret To: xml-dbms@egroups.com
              Message 6 of 8 , Nov 3, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                I would take xmldbms2.org - since we are about to jump on version 2. Let the "others" try to catch up.

                NS
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: Ronald Bourret
                To: xml-dbms@egroups.com
                Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 9:08 PM
                Subject: Re: [xml-dbms] Package Naming


                Yet another idea that occurred to me was to use xmldbms and then add a
                suffix. For example:

                xmldbms-org.org
                xmldbmsorg.org
                xmldbmssoftware.org
                xmldbmsjava.org
                etc.

                Any takers?

                -- Ron

                adam flinton wrote:
                >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:rpbourret@...]
                > > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 6:48 AM
                > > To: xml-dbms@egroups.com
                > > Subject: Re: [xml-dbms] Package Naming
                > >
                > >
                > > adam flinton wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Is org.xmldb or org.xmldatabase taken?
                > >
                > > org.xmldb is taken. org.xmldatabase is not.
                > >
                > > One reason I was thinking about org.xmldatabases (plural) is that
                > > XML-DBMS isn't really a database -- it's middleware, and I
                > > thought that
                > > the plural was better than the singular in this case.
                > >
                > > Here's some other ideas (I haven't checked if they're available, but
                > > assume they are). Any catch anyone's fancy?
                > >
                > > xmldbmsmiddleware.org
                > > xmlmiddleware.org
                > > datatransfer.org
                > > xmldatatransfer.org
                > > xmltransfer.org
                > > xmldbmstransfer.org
                > >
                >
                > Hummmmm..... I agree that we don't want anyone thinking it's some sort of
                > native XML DB.....but @ the same time we want XML & DB to be in there. I
                > think after some reflection (most of a cup of coffee) that the names with
                > transfer in it are the best as that is what's happening how about mentioning
                > SQL? i.e. xmlsqltransfer.org? Of those listed I prefer xmldatatransfer.org.
                >
                > Adam
                >
                >
                > To Post a message, send it to: xml-dbms@...
                >
                > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xml-dbms-unsubscribe@...

                --
                Ronald Bourret
                Programming, Writing, and Training
                XML, Databases, and Schemas
                http://www.rpbourret.com

                eGroups Sponsor


                To Post a message, send it to: xml-dbms@...

                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xml-dbms-unsubscribe@...



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • adam flinton
                Dear All, A Boring but vital piece of thought required re Package placing & naming. XD = My shorthand for XML-DBMS Some Constraints/ideas which I know of: A)
                Message 7 of 8 , Jan 23, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dear All,

                  A Boring but vital piece of thought required re Package placing & naming.

                  XD = My shorthand for XML-DBMS

                  Some Constraints/ideas which I know of:

                  A) Ron would like to stick to Java 1.1 within the Main XD code
                  B) The new Namespace is xmlmiddleware.org & I would like to use that to
                  provide OpenSource XML Middleware.
                  C) XD is part of that but not all of that.
                  D) Ron would like people to put all XD code through him such that he could
                  OK it before it becomes part of the XD tree within xmlmiddleware.org which
                  seems very sensible. However.....then it would be all to easy to overload
                  Ron by putting stuff past him which ***uses*** XD but does not actually
                  affect XD code per se i.e. wrappers & services (e.g. XSLT,
                  Messaging,GUI's,Servlets,Message Driven Bean server stuff / J2EE possibly DB
                  access...etc.etc.) & frankly both Ron & I (I think) would prefer that Ron
                  concentrated on getting XD2 out & solid & what everyone dreams of....<GD&R/>

                  I would like to start moving these "Services/Wrappers" to the
                  org.xmlmiddleware tree.

                  So there's the background.


                  So the possible solution is to make sure that XD stuff (& only the XD stuff)
                  is contained within org.xmlmiddleware.xmldbms.

                  So for instance the server stuff (for XD)could be in

                  org.xmlmiddleware.server.xmldbms.

                  & the GUI could be in

                  (generic GUI e.g. the treebuilder)

                  org.xmlmiddleware.gui

                  & the specific XD GUI stuff in:

                  org.xmlmiddleware.gui.xmldbms.

                  The vague tree I have in mind would be:

                  org.xmlmiddleware.

                  .Messaging
                  .JMS
                  .SOAP etc
                  .Transform
                  .xslt etc
                  .xmldbms
                  . etc
                  .server
                  .xmldbms
                  .StoredProcedure
                  .http? (Servlets etc)
                  .J2EE? (e.g. Message Driven Beans etc)
                  .gui
                  .xmldbms
                  .TreeBuilder
                  .DB
                  .io (GetFileURL, GetFileJNDI, ProcessProperties etc.)

                  You will notice that (as an easy example) the J2EE & GUI stuff would benefit
                  in many cases from using Java 2 based code. If all you wanted was the
                  "naked" XMLDBMS code then that could happily remain Java 1.1.

                  Thoughts on a postcard please <G/>.



                  --

                  Adam Flinton
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.