[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
- To: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@rpbourret.com>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 08:30:19 -0600
I'll buy that, but we have to be aware
that SQL even as extended remains the most
used and therefore understood of the
extant query languages. I'd truly hate
to see yet another W3C project that takes
three years to get to the CR stage and
meanwhile paralyzes efforts to improve
use of existing tech over the web.
ODBC isn't my first choice only because
timing issues are squirrely but yes something
like it is needed. Citrix apparently
offers some solutions but I don't know
a lot about them. Thanks for the URL!
Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
-----Original Message-----
From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:rpbourret@rpbourret.com]
"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" wrote:
>
> Wouldn't wrapped SQL be an improvement? Otherwise,
> aren't we going to see a lot of vendor-specific
> dialects FOR XML in SQL? Actually, I think that is
> exactly the kind of problem that Consortiums can
> address successfully since in essence it deals
> directly with interoperability and extensions.
I think that eventually there will be a standard way to deal with this
and that it will come, in part and possibly in total, from the W3C. I'll
put on my wizard's hat now and predict that the standard will consist of
two parts:
1) The W3C's query language, and
2) An ODBC-like API.
This should be buildable on top of any XML data store, whether it's a
native XML database, relational data exposed as XML, or an email file
with a beefy query engine.
Note that the XML:DB Initiative (http://www.xmldb.org) is taking a first
crack at the second part.
|