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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] XQuery types was Re: [xml-dev] Yet another plea for XUpdat

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>,<xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
  • Subject: RE: [xml-dev] XQuery types was Re: [xml-dev] Yet another plea for XUpdate...
  • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>
  • Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 11:02:57 -0700
  • Thread-index: AcH2uh8poWtRZ2LRQVeQYDaxP5gG8gAAGZXA
  • Thread-topic: [xml-dev] XQuery types was Re: [xml-dev] Yet another plea for XUpdate...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 11:02 AM
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] XQuery types was Re: [xml-dev] Yet 
> another plea for XUpdate...
> On Wed, 2002-05-08 at 13:36, Jonathan Robie wrote:
> > At 10:09 AM 5/8/2002 -0700, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> > >I personally fail to see any reason why XQuery
> > >implementers should go out of their way to try to be 
> interoperable if 
> > >doing so would require undue difficulty on their end.
> > 
> > Are you seriously saying that vendors should implement 
> whatever they 
> > want,
> > instead of implementing the spec, if they find something 
> that is easier to 
> > implement? Perhaps the W3C should stop writing 
> "Recommendations" and start 
> > writing "Hints". But I don't see how that leads to 
> interoperability, and I 
> > think users want interoperability.
> I think Dare was merely saying that the motivating factors 
> for XQuery implementors to focus on interop are different 
> from and less powerful than the motivating factors for W3C 
> XML Schema interop.
> The experiences I've had in moving information and queries 
> between relational databases suggest to me that he may in 
> fact be right.  All of it was SQL, yes...  but since 
> developers typically write code against a particular backend 
> at some point in the process, they don't worry about whether 
> that code will work just as well against any other backend.
> With schemas, there's a much greater chance that you'll be 
> sharing schemas which then need to work in a wide variety of 
> very different environments.


Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off all together. 
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
You assume all risk for your use. (c) 2002 Microsoft Corporation. All
rights reserved.


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

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