OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: updategrams

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: james anderson <james.anderson@mecomnet.de>
  • To: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>, xml-dev@xml.org
  • Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 12:39:33 +0200

Michael Rys wrote:
> Dear James
> > 2. anyone can give a rundown on why they went for a diff technique
> > rather than a direct pat specification with a replacement value?
> The scenarios that we tried to address were mid-tier caches that want to
> synchronize with the database. Direct pat[h] specifications with replacement
> values would not fit that well into these scenarios and would go more
> towards an update language that would require a query language.

that sounds more reasonable. i suppose i'd have to have read the
scenariour to know how these caches were expected to behave, but i'm
still surprised that one would want to work out a yet another addressing mechanism.

>                                                                 While XPath
> could cover some aspects, we did not want to invent something in that space
> before XML Query and its relationship to update languages is clear.

well, sometimes it's hard not to.

> Please note that people can design their own XML update language in
> conjunction with the OpenXML XML rowset provider inside T-SQL stored
> procedures.

i was wondering 'cause i had done an update mechanism against an object
database and found (for the large object case which im mentioned in the
previous message) ended up using path-based adressing...

  • Follow-Ups:


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS