[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
They are sure interesting and real (I worked on transaction issues for
most of my thesis), but there are many aspects that are not needed to
finish the DML standardization effort.
One difference between the SQL and XQuery standardization effort is that
XQuery leaves many of the environmental components (such as APIs, DDL,
Isolation levels) out because we assume that the language may be used in
many different contexts. I hope that we continue to follow that
philosophy.
Best regards
Michael
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@datadirect.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 9:50 AM
> To: Michael Rys
> Cc: Dare Obasanjo; Liam Quin; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Why *is* XQuery taking so long?
>
> I agree with Michael's estimate of the timing. But I do think we have
a
> lot more to work on than just the syntax. The issues concerning the
> semantics of transations are real and interesting.
>
> Jonathan
>
> Michael Rys wrote:
> > Not fair :-)
> >
> > Actually, there is a pretty far advanced proposal for what we call
the
> > data manipulation language. The questions become more political in
the
> > sense I prefer keyword X over Y or error instead of no-op and
whether we
> > need to go beyond the basic language semantics and delve into
broader
> > transaction management issues (I personally hope not).
> >
> > So my guess is that it is within the next year that we will see
first
> > output from the working group, but that it will take probably
another
> > two to three years to get the spec to recommendation status.
|
