[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 02:27 PM 9/25/2002 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>Good enough. It seems to confirm a document model paradigm. Is
>that right?
Yes.
>But that query sure is uglier than SQL. Maybe it is the beholder thing.
Forest to forest transformations lead to uglier syntax than table oriented
transformations. But if you compare it to SQL 99, maybe it starts to look a
little better ;->
>It will be interesting to see how one trains people for developing
>these. In other words, it took years to get them to accept and
>build tables and reports. Now it is as if they have to build
>reports (documents) first, and code to the report structures instead
>of the underlying tables. Somehow that doesn't feel like progress.
>What am I missing?
You are making the assumption that anything with a complex structure is a
report. There's a lot of data out there with complex structure, and you
don't have to turn it into rows and columns for it to be real data.
Jonathan
|
