Re: newby (very) question on XML DB theory
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 18:21:53 -0500
Message-ID: <c5kh2j$tom$1_at_news.netins.net>
"Jan Hidders" <jan.hidders_at_REMOVETHIS.pandora.be> wrote in message
news:_Sifc.71601$8Y.4733048_at_phobos.telenet-ops.be...
> Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:
> > "Jan Hidders" <jan.hidders_at_REMOVETHIS.pandora.be> wrote in message
> > news:Eyhfc.71539$0O2.4854903_at_phobos.telenet-ops.be...
> >>Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:
> >>>"Jan Hidders" <jan.hidders_at_REMOVETHIS.pandora.be> wrote in message
> >>>news:CWXec.70566$IX6.4421683_at_phobos.telenet-ops.be...
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > From:
> >
> >>>LIST COURSES WITH INSTRUCTOR_LAST_NAME LIKE "VAN..."
> >
> > to:
> >
> >>//Courses[starts-with(.//_at_instructor_last_name, "VAN")]
> >
> > That's how far we have moved in 40 years?
>
> No, it's just a single XQuery expression that shows that a certain query
> is not as complicated in XQuery as you implied it was. Why you or anyone
> would think that one such example describes completely and in all
> aspects "how far we have moved" is beyond me and strikes me as a bit
> simplistic.
We are not yet on the same wavelength on this one, Jan. Please understand that I'm excited about the possibilities with XQuery more than your average SQL-kinda-guy. I have not used XQuery yet, but I have read much of "XQuery from the Experts" and have verified some of the aspects I care about, such as use of a 2-valued logic. I'm not concerned about the complexity of the language "for me" but am lamenting the loss that I can see exemplified (not proven) in what you see above. This is the change from the language written as GIRLS in the mid-60's to XQuery 40 years later, both working against very similar data models. XQuery has many features that GIRLS (the PICK query language) lacks and will be, on the whole, a move forward.
But, I don't think this is just one of those "I like my tools because I know
them" issues -- I think that everyone here in Iowa could see what I mean by
reading those statements -- can you see it and understand at least a little
bit my lament on this? Couldn't we retain the human-language-like nature of
both PICK and to a lesser extent, SQL, and still accomplish the goals of
XQuery? Must it look and read like the language of a computer, even though
we know it is?
--dawn
Received on Thu Apr 15 2004 - 01:21:53 CEST