Hi there,

looking at the current bits i can see a transform from M to XML.
But what seems to be missing is a transform from (XSD+XML) => M Schema + M

Any plans for this?

I think you need to support this scenario as most metadata (or models as you call them)
is now encoded as XML

Thanks

Tim

Tim,

There is no tool at this time.However,a number of the people who work on M used to work on XML, so this is a scenario that is important to us. If I get any additional information, I'll update this post.

Thanks for the feedback and your interest!

David

Timothy--sorry for the delay in acknowledging your post and working on a response. As you might have seen, we just got the next CTP out which was occupying our energies. Anyway, thanks for your patience as I get an answer for you.

.Kraig

Tim,

There is no tool at this time.However,a number of the people who work on M used to work on XML, so this is a scenario that is important to us. If I get any additional information, I'll update this post.

Thanks for the feedback and your interest!

David

David is exactly right.

In fact you've inspired me to blog a bit about it in more detail. http://tinyfinger.blogspot.com/2009/05/m-interop-with-xml-and-others.html.

---

-- pinky --/ http://www.tinyfinger.com/

Hey Pinky,

thank you for taking care of this and even blogging ;-).

Quote:
>>We also think about interop at the schema level. For example, if we transform an MGraph to XML, then wouldn't it be great to transform the representative >>schema for that data into XSD? That's something we haven't quite done yet, but again I don't think that it would be hard, just work. We don't really have >>that booked to implement right now. Do people see a huge need?

I have one thought on this as it is besides the original request probably the second most interesting. Indeed the question arises a bit. I assume when you store to SQL and get it back you can get an MGraph. I Also assume you can get it back directly from sql server in future as sql server can execute .net code. This means that when i have java program i can ask sql server for MGraph of a stored model and get it back as XML + XSD eventually.
Why would i want XSD? Well if i have XSD i can generate classes for reading and wrting that xml similar as xsd.exe /classes does in .NET Framework.

I think you need to support Java, PHP and possibly even Oracle based scenarios in future.

This is something that can help

Tim

The 'M promise' is to establish a toolchain and modeling environment that supercedes what exists today. To prove the theory, demonstrating that 'M' can support existing languages (e.g. C#, Java, XML) and models (e.g. UML, XSD) is important. Not to mention the migration and interoperability challenges mentioned in the blog comments here. If my team is building a system in 'M', and they obtain an XML or XML Schema definition from a third party, how do they integrate the external 'model' into the system? Lack of XSD/XML interoperability limits the value of MUrl and M.