Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate&Darwin?[M.Gittens]
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:34:53 +0200
Message-ID: <MPG.1d2b1c0b6e65b7d49896b5_at_news.ntnu.no>
In article <5gbve.129762$xR7.7073902_at_phobos.telenet-ops.be>,
jan.hidders_at_REMOVETHIS.pandora.be says...
> Also note, btw., that a Real RDBMS that allows you to define a domain
> that captures all the aspects of an XML document as described in the
> definition, would pretty much satisfy the definition.
Not really. It would not have "an XML document as its fundamental unit of (logical) storage, just as a relational database has a row in a table as its fundamental unit of (logical) storage.", and it would not have the property that "The only interface to the data in native XML databases is XML and related technologies, such as XPath, the DOM, or an XML-specific API, such as the XML:DB API".
Basically, it seems, a native XML database is a database that can store XML and XML *only*, and that can't be accessed through anything but XMLbased technologies. Seems like "XML-enabled databases" is actually a more powerful concept....
-- JonReceived on Tue Jun 28 2005 - 09:34:53 CEST