Message text written by "Duane Nickull"
>
Although I am not an XMI expert, the one persistant shortcoming that I
keep
hearing with XMI is that it cannot provide a "consistent" way to
interchange
metadata. Does anyone have an answer for this comment?
Duane Nickull
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Add to this that XMI creates DTD's that look like they have been
written by a machine. I.e. no self-respecting human would want these
for a production environment.
Now this is a critism - based on the fact that humans write DTD's that
contain a whole level of intelligence and criteria that are NOT part of
a UML model today - such as Oracle SQL optimization criteria, just
as an example.
OK - this was my point earlier - as machine intelligence increases and
peoples understanding of what a good production quality DTD does
and does not contain, then you can get XMI to mimic this behavoiur.
We are not there yet! Am I about to 'spray paint the car' so the robot
can copy me 100 times faster right now? I'm probably not ready to
do that either! <g>.
This is why I see that XMI, UML and related tools will improve, but
not for another one year minimum, as we're all still learning.
DW.
