Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Why *is* XQuery taking so long?
- From: Michael Champion <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:48:37 -0400
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=tL0YpTITyc/lXLeX42ljpJvBuSzSBwyhMoL5FiNtX304ldKB6n/8qSwKrg9M8pVrs7veBH8KtMMkrIrL0WaUcOFPJ357jHWRcLc1qQe7hPEBsFlfp5EEX+d7RbytKHRN8W//GKylCt4FK/g0u62WPQosozFNlRn2OIoA/wywZyE
- Reply-to: Michael Champion <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I know it takes time to release quality specs, but I can't seem to
> find any valid reason why XQuery is not out of the working draft
> stage yet.
This is a bit of a permathread, but I would like to solicit opinions
from current or former XQuery participants or outside observers. The
XQuery activity kicked off with a workshop in 1998 and the working
group was chartered in 1999. 5 years later, no Recommendation in
sight. Why did this happen?
To kick things off, my recollection of the rough consensus from the
last time this permathread surfaced was:
- XQuery's requirements were far too ambitious and beyond the state of
the art. It became an exercise in design by committee rather than
standardizing actual experience.
- XQuery has become rather tightly coupled with several other W3C
specs, especially Schema, XPath, and XSLT. As is usually the case,
this creates a bit of a hairball -- changing anything requires
- There are a lot of conflicting intellectual and corporate agendas
interacting, and coming to a mutually acceptable consensus is
challenging at best.
Are any of these in dispute, and what other reasons are there?