[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Once you've fundamentally handicapped yourself by tying your data model/programming language to XML Schema then you are already broken. It's like saying "I did the best job I could painting my apartment with a tootthbrush". The thing to do isn't asking for better ways to paint apartments with a toothbrush but instead realizing you picked the wrong tool for the job.
They weren't small bugs. These are issues we debated for over a year and every solution we reached was a compromise that seemed broken from one perspective or another. We weren't just trying to implement XQuery we had people looking at the issue from both the perspective of programming language integration (X#/Xen) and programming model integration (myself). In the context of XQuery, I'll admit that the issues with the data model can be brushed aside as small bugs especially once you have to swallow all the interesting issues you get from being based on XSD (e.g. if I have an element of type xs:integer, what is the type of its child node?).
--
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
Never make anything simple and efficient when a way can be found to make it complex and wonderful.
________________________________
From: Daniela Florescu [mailto:dflorescu@mac.com]
Sent: Thu 12/2/2004 5:28 PM
To: Dare Obasanjo
Cc: Elliotte Harold; Jonathan Robie; Michael Champion; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] XML-aware programming language?
Dare,
On Dec 2, 2004, at 2:58 PM, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> XQuery is a good read-only data model for XML but a bad one as a
> read-write model. I wrote about all the frustrations of trying to build
> programming models around the XQuery data model at
> http://www.25hoursaday.com/weblog/PermaLink.aspx?guid=9b799a26-c1f9
> -40ba
> -9502-e30569c39e11
>
I read your comment and I have the same reaction as Jonathan's.
Yes, indeed, I don't think that the XQuery Data Model could have done
it any differently given the circumstances.
Do you have any constructive comments ?
If you see any better alternative, please say so loudly and I promise
that I'l convince the XQuery WG to listen. We just weren't smart enough
to find a better way to avoid the problems.
But please be careful not to trough the baby with the bath water. In the
grand scheme of things, those small annoyances aren't that important.
Yes, XQuery Data Model is not 100% perfect. Yes, XQuery is not perfect.
(BTW, do you know of any perfect technology? If yes, let me know
because I
couldn't find any yet...)
Please try to think of the advantages of what their existence bring
instead of thinking
of their small bugs, and please remember to compare the two.
Best regards,
Dana
|
