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] XML-enabled databases, XQuery APIs

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

On 4/15/05, Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@rpbourret.com> wrote:
> We're talking apples and oranges here.
> What you're talking about is a generic set of relational tables like
> Elements, Attributes, Text, Comments, and ProcessingInstructions. 

Well, no, not in our case, but that's beside the point.

> This
> is generally considered to be a native XML database implemented on top
> of a relational database. In fact, this is roughly how SQL Server
> implements their XML data type.
> What I'm talking about is a set of tables designed to store documents
> corresponding to a particular XML schema. For example, mapping a sales
> order document to the Sales, Items, Customers, and Parts tables. While
> such tables can, in theory, store things like sibling order, comments,
> and processing instructions, in practice they almost never do. This is
> generally known as "shredding".
> One significant difference between the two is that the first in some way
> looks like an XML document while the second is indistinguishable from
> other relational data.

Given that any general XML schema has a direct mapping to things like
"Elements, Attributes, Text, Comments, and ProcessingInstructions"
you're examples aren't apples and oranges, they're different degrees
of normalization. Thus, the point is; if your going to "shred" you can
shred with as much fidelity to the XML model as you choose to
implement.  Whether you end up using a "native XML on top of
relational" schema or some other schema has little to do with the

Peter Hunsberger


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

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