[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> From reading the section on data and types in the XQuery Formal semantics
> document at
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/query-semantics/#sec_model
>
> it looks like the type system involved is XML schema. The W3C wants XQuery
> processors/engines/etc
> to be schema aware instead of relying on constraints and validation in the
> underlying XML repository.
Looks like "DTDs version two" are here. The complex validation layer ...
Probably almost useless for most of real-life applications, that are driven
by
business rules and constraints, 'linking' one part of data to 'another'
part of data. I'm not talking about the repositories. It does not matter,
if there is repository or whatever. There are 'linking' constraints and
business rules in this world.
Simple types are very low-level (and programming language specific)
'Universal' types do not exist. OMG, is XML re-inventing CORBA now?
Cool, then. I thought that XML is just a syntax, which is very good
for manual markup of mixed content documents. It is now a 'CORBA
killer', providing the world with 'Universal XML types'. This is
really pathetic.
Now it is time to put that XML 1.1 + control characters + patents +
something else, comparable to namespaces into this great metling
pot, called 'XML'. I'd love to see it happening next year.
Rgds.Paul.
PS. If 'learning' terseXML notation has taken you longer, than, say, 1
minute,
I would like to know what particular problems do you have
terseXML notation is :
A {} instead of <A></A>
A; Instead of <A/>
A [some="attr"]{ "some text" } instead of <A some="attr">some text</A>
Everything can be escaped with, say '\'.
XML syntax is of course slightly better for rich mixed content.
However, I doubt that XQuery is a solution for mixed content,
comparing it to XSLT.
|
