Measuring complexity in OGC web services XML schemas: pragmatic use and solutions

The use of standards in the geospatial domain, such as those defined by the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), for exchanging data has brought a great deal of interoperability upon which systems can be built in a reliable way. Unfortunately, these standards are becoming increasingly complex, making their implementation an arduous task. The use of appropriate software metrics can be very useful to quantify different properties of the standards that ultimately may suggest different solutions to deal with problems related to their complexity. In this regard, we present in this article an attempt to measure the complexity of the schemas associated with the OGC implementation specifications. We use a comprehensive set of metrics to provide a multidimensional view of this complexity. These metrics can be used to evaluate the impact of design decisions, study the evolution of schemas, and so on. We also present and evaluate different solutions that could be applied to overcome some of the problems associated with the complexity of the schemas.

[1]  Fernando Brito e Abreu,et al.  Evaluating the impact of object-oriented design on software quality , 1996, Proceedings of the 3rd International Software Metrics Symposium.

[2]  Schade Sven,et al.  Augmenting SDI with Linked Data , 2010 .

[3]  Roy Fielding,et al.  Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures"; Doctoral dissertation , 2000 .

[4]  Carlos Granell,et al.  Empirical Study of Sensor Observation Services Server Instances , 2011, AGILE Conf..

[5]  Tom Mens,et al.  Future trends in software evolution metrics , 2001, IWPSE '01.

[6]  Sanjay Misra,et al.  Measuring and Evaluating a Design Complexity Metric for XML Schema Documents , 2009, J. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[7]  Mansur H. Samadzadeh,et al.  Determining the complexity of XML documents , 2005, International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing (ITCC'05) - Volume II.

[8]  Kwok-bun Yue,et al.  Analysis and Metrics of XML Schema , 2004, Software Engineering Research and Practice.

[9]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design , 2015, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[10]  Cem Kaner,et al.  Software Engineering Metrics: What Do They Measure and How Do We Know? , 2004 .

[11]  Jiulin Sun,et al.  Web GIS: Principles and Applications , 2010 .

[12]  Christian Huemer,et al.  Size Matters!? Measuring the Complexity of XML Schema Mapping Models , 2010, 2010 6th World Congress on Services.

[13]  Carlos Granell,et al.  Analysing complexity of XML schemas in geospatial web services , 2011, COM.Geo.

[14]  Anas N. Al-Rabadi,et al.  A comparison of modified reconstructability analysis and Ashenhurst‐Curtis decomposition of Boolean functions , 2004 .

[15]  Arvind Malhotra,et al.  XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition , 2004 .

[16]  Oasis RELAX NG Specification , 2001 .

[17]  Joost Visser Structure Metrics for XML Schema , 2006 .

[18]  Michael F. Goodchild,et al.  Towards a general theory of geographic representation in GIS , 2007, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[19]  Carlos Granell,et al.  Dealing with large schema sets in mobile SOS-based applications , 2011, COM.Geo.

[20]  Haruo Hosoya Foundations of XML Processing: The Tree-Automata Approach , 2010 .

[21]  Kevin Williams,et al.  Professional XML Schemas , 2001 .

[22]  Thomas Schwentick,et al.  Expressiveness and complexity of XML Schema , 2006, TODS.

[23]  David Beech,et al.  XML-Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition , 2004 .

[24]  Denilson Barbosa,et al.  Studying the XML Web: Gathering Statistics from an XML Sample , 2006, World Wide Web.

[25]  Eric M. Dashofy Issues in generating data bindings for an xml schema-based language , 2001 .

[26]  Fernando Brito e Abreu,et al.  Candidate metrics for object-oriented software within a taxonomy framework , 1994, J. Syst. Softw..

[27]  Michael I. Schwartzbach,et al.  An introduction to XML and web technologies , 2005 .