> Re comment in 1. Introduction that "Someone should be able to store DTD�s
> without going through modelling processes" I wholeheartedly endorse this.
> Writing a DTD is a modelling process. It should not be necessary to
> duplicate this effort using UML.
I would like to defend the Technical Architecture document on this point.
It says: "A mechanism for deriving XML syntax from UML models in a
consistent manner is a requirement."
UML is a vastly richer medium for modeling the semantics of business data
and processes, as compared with UML. This is not a criticism of XML. It is
just an acknowledgement that UML and XML were invented for different
purposes. Deriving an XML syntax from a UML model in a consistent manner
means you *don't* repeat the modeling process; rather, you use the superior
modeling medium to model the domain and then generate the XML syntax
according to a well-defined pattern.
David S. Frankel
Genesis Development Corporation
