Re: [WEB400] RE: XML vs. Name Value pair

["Nathan M. Andelin" <nandelin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: "Bartell, Aaron L. (TC)" <ALBartell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Today you have this name value pair standard for passing shipping
> acknowledgements from one company to another. Tomorrow a big company like
> CopyMax wants to do business with you and given the money they can bring
> into a company they throw their weight around and tell you that you have
to
> conform to their name value pair standard.  Their standard follows the
same
> basic structure as yours except they name all of their name value pairs
> differently. Instead of FromCredentialDomain they might just say FromId,
for
> example.  Now you have to either write another program or build a
> translation procedure based on who sent you the request to adhere to their
> request.

It sounds like storing the field names in a cross-reference file would
eliminate the need for another program.  One might implement code like:

myFieldVal = getFieldValue(getXrefName(fieldName, customerID))

where the getXrefName chains to the applicable field name in the
cross-reference file.


> What happens if the request contains multiple orders?  How do you say that
> LineItem1 belongs to the first or second order?  Now you are going to have
> to write some nifty parsing routines because parentage is going to be a
pain
> in the butt.  You will most likely have to build in a multiple nested
array
> structure within your name value pair names or qualify the heck out of
your
> names (&Order1_Item1=1234).

I suppose you could separate orders with a carriage-return line-feed
sequence and process one line at a time.  But it also sounds like a good
case for using XML.

Nathan M. Andelin
www.relational-data.com