468,119 Members | 1,981 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 468,119 developers. It's quick & easy.

How to represent links within XML & XSD?

I'm trying to represent a linked relationship among between nodes as

<!-- Top level nodes -->
<City>Los Angeles</City>
<City>San Francisco</City>
<City>Washington DC</City>

<!-- User level nodes -->
<City>/Cities/City[2]</City> <!-- Links to top level nodes -->

<Weight>/Dimensions/Weight/Metric/Tonnes</Weight> <!-- Links
to top level nodes -->
<Height>/Dimensions/Height/Metric/Metres</Height> <!-- Links
to top level nodes -->
Is it possible to represent this relationship both at design-time (in
the schema/XSD) and at run-time (in the XML document)?

Is there a way to do this in XLink/XPointers such that in Java code I
could, for example, transparently use the linked objects as follows:


(Unless I absolutely have to, I don't want to write additional code to
"understand" the semantics of the links to the city, height and weight.
That is, in a Java program, the links should "automatically" refer to
and retrieve the top-level data as "objects" rather than just plain

Thanks in advance,

May 4 '06 #1
3 1469
The traditional way to represent point-to-point links within an XML
document is by an ID attribute defining the point of interest and IDREF
attributes pointing to those points. Schema does have that concept.

This does require that you explicitly follow the IDREF connection. The
standard XML APIs have some assistance for doing so, eg the DOM's
getElementByID operation. Your example isn't using those APIs -- it's
assuming data binding -- so you need to check the specs of your data
binding tool to see what it does in that regard.
() ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Joe Kesselman
/\ Stamp out HTML e-mail! | System architexture and kinetic poetry
May 5 '06 #2
The biggest failing of ID/IDREF is that the link has no way of
expressing any semantic value as to why the relationship was
established. ID/IDREFs rely on the text that is highlighted to explain
why the link was inserted. This model works if the authors understand
the semantic meaning of the links that should point to or from the file
that they were authoring. And, although this isn't important as yet,
ID/IDREF can't express bi-directional links.

I was reading up on XLinks and it appears that XLink enables you to:
(1) Link between resources without the need to change them (very imp
req in my case)
(2) Build new documents dynamically from a template link document
(could be imp as an alternative)
(3) Have true bi-directional links between resources (not imp)
(4) Group sets of related resources in strongly typed relationships
(5) Link between structured and unstructured information (very imp)
(6) Manage large repositories of link information in a centralised
efficient manner (not imp)
(7) Link resources that are stored in a variety of different data
repositories (imp)
(8) Create links using any application that creates XML XLink documents
(not sure)

I don't know if ID/IDREF can do those or how XLink can do them, with or
without using a separate tool other than a traditional XML parser.

May 5 '06 #3
ak****@gmail.com wrote:
The biggest failing of ID/IDREF is that the link has no way of
expressing any semantic value as to why the relationship was
Not entirely true; that's a matter of how you design your document.
Remember, the IDREF doesn't exist in a vacuum; its context may provide
additional information.

Keys, defined in the Schema spec, are a more flexible alternative to IDs
and (because there are multiple key spaces rather than a single shared
space for all IDs) may be more felxible in this regard.
ID/IDREF can't express bi-directional links.
I was reading up on XLinks

XLink is indeed a much richer mechanism. There still isn't much
off-the-shelf support available for it, unfortunately, so actually using
it productively can be a challenge. And you did way you didn't want to
write additional code.
Joe Kesselman / Beware the fury of a patient man. -- John Dryden
May 5 '06 #4

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

reply views Thread by Thomas Scheffler | last post: by
25 posts views Thread by Shannon Jacobs | last post: by
22 posts views Thread by Fred Ma | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Ptaku25 | last post: by
1 post views Thread by boclair | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Bart Steur | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.