Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
After twisting this a few times (like a Rubik's Cube), my opinion. If indeed you want the choices to come from separately developed sources, you are as you say probably down to the choice, aka, Or group, aka, Switch. Otherwise, assume a separate non-Schema, say human readable (aggggghghgh!) control exists. Why? The other two by definition involve a structural and by inference, perhaps, semantic commonality which to exist must have some common control/rule/contract to constrain them. In other words, you have defined a chicken or egg problem that has no solution until you 1. Decide that there is a structural relationship and a type relationship, meaning, you have prior knowledge, or 2. Decide that this is a choice among black boxes with all private information, therefore, you need no prior knowledge; just that all choices are equally probable and the only semantic is "containment". For the constraints of your ideal, you have to know what you mean by "disjoint" or "independent" development. Just as systems like COM need a common and enforced contract for discovery of the interfaces (e.g., must implement IUnknown), you preclude this contract with "independent" and "disjoint" development. Therefore, content which is perfectly substitutable requires the container and by implication the processing semantic to also "not care". The Choice is the laissez-faire or "only local implementation knows" or "or results unspecified or see Documentation" practice. The rest have a semantic of type. These are a separate Best Practice question. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
|
