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] What niche is XQuery targeting?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Perhaps XQuery has not taken off because it was designed primarily as query language for an XML database? If we look back at the justifications for XQuery - optimization stands out as primary reason.
 
Given such a pre-requisite it seems like XML databases have to take off before XQuery can.
 
If the issue is transformation - I think XSLT does an admirable job.
 
Of course whether XQuery turns out to be the winner or some variant of SQL is an open question.
 
I doubt XSLT will win - mainly because I don't think it was designed with database querying and transformation in mind.
 
So to me it is clear as to what niche XQuery is targeting - it is targeting the database community that wants to jump on the XML bandwagon.
 
XLST is targeting the document community that is more interested in transformations.
 
The way I see it is XML Schema, data type etc are the bread butter of the data community (and database community in particular).
 
The initial set of standards were driven primarily by the document community - illustrated by the history of XML.
 
The new set of standards are being driven by the data community to address their needs.
 
Given the driving forces, It doesn't really matter whether XQuery or XSLT are semantically equivalent or not...
prakash
Tom Bradford <tbradford@openlinksw.com> wrote:
Let's paint a broader picture. I don't think we're talking about market
adoption of a standard, we're talking about market adoption of a
technology. A good example: C++ was finally standardized in 1997, but
was already gaining rapid momentum shortly after being created in 1985.
C++ gained an audience because it addressed its target audiences
problems, for the most part, appropriately, and they overwhelmingly
didn't care whether or not it was standardized, or even had
implementations that were compatible with each other. We can make the
same case for SQL.

Technologies don't become adopted because of their standards status,
they're adopted on their own virtues, or because Microsoft tells you
that you have to adopt them. XQuery has not been finalized for years,
yet it hasn't changed all that much from the 10k ft view, making it a
perfectly good candidate for implementations, even moreso than SQL or
C++ were in their early years. The implementations are there, and
they're mostly good, so now the question to ask is why aren't people
using them in the numbers you were expecting?

--
Tom Bradford - Virtuoso Technology Evangelist
OpenLink Software: http://www.openlinksw.com/
Personal Web Log: http://www.tbradford.org/


Jonathan Robie wrote:
> Tom Bradford wrote:
>
>> On the contrary, I think the fact that it's now December of 2004, and
>> we've yet to see a rec of XQuery 1.0, even though it's been touted as
>> the de-facto successor in XML query languages for years leaves ample
>> room for comparison. Any language that has been built up on that much
>> hype for so long, yet is not finished, is open for comparison to any
>> other, even if it hasn't found widespread acceptance.
>
>
> I think that market adoption of a standard is hugely influenced by (1)
> a completed standard, and (2) good implementations of that completed
> standard.
>
> If you think a fair comparison can be made without taking these into
> account, I guess we disagree.
>
> Jonathan
>

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org , an
initiative of OASIS

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager:


Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! Get yours free!



 

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

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