Re: Nearest Common Ancestor Report (XDb1's $1000 Challenge)

> The choice to use one syntax for modifying both intension and extension,
> as opposed to the clear seperation of DML and DDL in SQL, gives me the
> impression that end users of XDb1 databases will be allowed to use this
> language to modify both the intension and the extension at will. While
> that may be acceptable in some situations, it usually isn't,

You are correct (XDb1 is partially aimed at AI-type applications where such modifications maybe more appropriate and where the programmer may be a program).  

> OTOH, you sometimes write that the app should check things, like in the
> above quote. That can only be done if the english-like language is not
> made available to end users. But in that case, why would you bother to use
> that language in the first place?

Just as a custom program can provide checks before entering info in a SQL Server db, so can a custom app provide checks before entering info into an XDb1 db. The standard XDb1 interface is extremely lenient. A custom app can be much stricter. A custom app access the db via a DLL. Received on Wed May 26 2004 - 02:37:05 CEST