Different ways to set out an xml file

[cashdeskmac]

Can anyone tell me the difference between these two xml files:

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<Bookshop>
<book title="my first book" author="someone"/>
<book title="another book" author="someone else"/>

<DVD title="how to cook" director="TV Chef"/>
<DVD title="Gardening" director="TV gardener"/>
</Bookshop>

and:

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<Bookshop>
<Books>
<book title="my first book" author="someone"/>
<book title="another book" author="someone else"/>
</Books>

<DVDs>
<DVD title="how to cook" director="TV Chef"/>
<DVD title="Gardening" director="TV gardener"/>
</DVDs>
</Bookshop>

Both allow me to generate a schema and fill a DataSet, but is there any significant difference between them, and is one prefered over the other?

 

[tsuji]

>Both allow me to generate a schema and fill a DataSet
But that is not going to be a criterion to select one over the other. I guess one has to overcome the idea that one kind of rendering is "necessarily" better than the other, except some over-zealous practitioners. Common sense rules and the extension plan rules.

Common senses rules because you have not tried this kind of thing.
[tt]
<book title="my first book" author="someone"/>
<book>
<title>another book</title>
<author>someone else</author>
</book>
[/tt]
That is already a proof. I'm sure one can make out a schema for that but it is so awkward to logically managing it conceptually and performance-wise...

Extension plan matters. If you have something in mind to add to book which may be different from that to add to dvd, then using <books></books> vs <dvd></dvd> would be a good idea.

Then, there are performance consideration. The size of source files, the easiness of retrieving or reading it...

I would not worry too much at this stage. At some time, somebody is bound to be unhappy of this or that. Whether it is too late to change is a matter of management.

In sum, I have no opinion yet I find I had typed so many syllables for nothing...

ps. Don't take the above seriously, I'm no expert, and have no pretention to be one.