[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 12:35 PM 5/7/2002 -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> > Please, can we see some queries that cause problems, or things that are
> > hard to say or do in XQuery?
>
>No. I'm not looking for additional features - I'm looking for fewer
>features. This isn't a question of particular queries needing
>additional features.
Then could you take some examples out of our specification or use case
document and argue that people really don't need to do these things, and it
is a mistake to define a language with this power?
You say you don't like types. Suppose that the user has a document that
validates according to some schema. In that document, salary is a decimal:
<person>
<name>Jonathan Robie</name>
<salary> 3.14 </salary>
</person>
<person>
<name>Uche Ogbuji</name>
<salary> 2341235.34 </salary>
<person>
The schema tells me that name is a string and salary is a decimal. The user
created data using this schema, and the user knows full well that salary is
a number and name is not.
I would like the following query to succeed:
avg( input()//person/salary )
I would also like indexes to be able to make such queries fast, to enable
appropriate sorting based on an index. I would like the following to be
efficient:
//person sortby (salary)
That means that I want persistent systems to use the type information for
indexing.
I would like the following query to fail:
avg( input()//person/name )
I would like it to fail without forcing me to execute the query. That's
what we call static typing. This query is simply wrong, and a query
processor can know that.
So far, when we have said things like this, you have responded with
position statements - XML is a representation, and is not about philosophy.
Don't you think that users have notions of types, and that users believe
that salaries can be averaged but names can not? Why is it wrong for XML
processing to act in accordance with what most users will expect?
Jonathan
|
