Developing XML Documents with Guaranteed “Good” Properties

  • David W. Embley
  • Wai Y. Mok
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2224)


Many XML documents are being produced, but there are no agreed-upon standards formally defining what it means for complying XML documents to have “good” properties. In this paper we present a formal definition for a proposed canonical normal form for XML documents called XNF. XNF guarantees that complying XML documents have maximally compact connectivity while simultaneously guaranteeing that the data in complying XML documents cannot be redundant. Further, we present a conceptual-model-based methodology that automatically generates XNF-compliant DTDs and prove that the algorithms, which are part of the methodology, produce DTDs to ensure that all complying XML documents satisfy the properties of XNF.


Grad Student Model Instance Object Role Inclusion Constraint Compact Connectivity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [BGH00]
    L. Bird, A. Goodchild, and T. Halpin. Object role modelling and xmlschema. In Proceedings of the Ninteenth International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER2000), pages 309–322, Salt Lake City, Utah, October 2000.Google Scholar
  2. [BR00]
    V. Bisová and K. Richta. Transformation of uml models into xml. In Proceedings the 2000 ADBIS-DASFAA Symposium on Advances in Databases and Information Systems, pages 33–45, Prague, Czech Republic, September 2000.Google Scholar
  3. [CSF00]
    R. Conrad, Deiter Scheffner, and J.C. Freytag. XML conceptual modeling using UML. In Proceedings of the Ninteenth International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER2000), Salt Lake City, Utah, October 2000. 558–571.Google Scholar
  4. [EKW92]
    D.W. Embley, B.D. Kurtz, and S.N. Woodfield. Object-oriented Systems Analysis: A Model-Driven Approach. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1992.Google Scholar
  5. [Emb98]
    D.W. Embley. Object Database Development: Concepts and Principles. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1998.Google Scholar
  6. [FMU82]
    R. Fagin, A.O. Mendelzon, and J.D. Ullman. A simplified universal relation assumption and its properties. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 7(3):343–360, September 1982.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [Hal99]
    T. Halpin. Conceptual Schema & Relational Database Design. WytLytPub, revised 2nd edition, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. [Ken81]
    W. Kent. Consequences of assuming a universal relation. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 6(4):539–556, December 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [MEN96]
    W.Y. Mok, D.W. Embley, and Y-K. Ng. A normal form for precisely characterizing redundancy in nested relations. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 21(1):77–106, March 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [Mok]
    W.Y. Mok. A comparative study of various nested normal forms. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering. (to appear).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • David W. Embley
    • 1
  • Wai Y. Mok
    • 2
  1. 1.Brigham Young UniversityProvo, UtahUSA
  2. 2.University of Alabama at HuntsvilleHuntsville, AlabamaUSA

Personalised recommendations