Lists Home |
Date Index |
The only thing I'd add is that there is no requirement that these be
Web-based. For example, the XML:DB API provides a vehicle for sending
queries and receiving results.
It also seems that type 2 includes lots of useful things like QPath and
XQuery expressions, so it's hardly retrograde. In fact, non-XML based
query languages are likely to be a lot clearer in a lot of cases that
Leigh Dodds wrote:
> I've been musing on something lately, and wondered if
> this has occured to anyone else...
> There seems to be several types of 'query' interfaces at
> the moment. i.e. a simple request/response interaction
> with a server.
> Type 1. Web based, non XML
> The standard HTTP based querying that's been around for
> years. Query parameters encoded as GET/POST, with response
> in protocol specific format
> Type 2. Web based, XML response
> Again querying is based on HTTP, parameters encoded
> as GET/POST, with response(s) in XML.
> Type 3. Web based, XML request/response
> XML document based query interface (e.g. XML-RPC,
> SOAP over HTTP), and XML response
> Type 4. Protocol neutral, XML request/response
> The high end. Protocol agnostic. E.g SOAP.
> Does anyone think this is a useful classification?