Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate&Darwin?[M.Gittens]
Date: 3 Jul 2005 22:19:48 -0700
Jan Hidders wrote:
> lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com wrote:
> > Jan Hidders wrote:
> >>lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com wrote:
> >>>Jim Gray said to me once, face to face, that
> >>>"XML might, just might, be THE next Data Model".
> > Any how, even if he had meant that it was just a fact of
> > life, good or bad, that will XML dominate over RM it still
> > is a strange statement.
> Really? Why? I certainly wouldn't exclude that possibility.
We could start out by asking what he meant by that statement. Did he mean that database research will focus mainly on XML from now on (which *has* happened a long time ago!), or did he mean that XML will become, as model, more important than the RM (or SQL) for enterprises using databases?
Having used both SQL-based products and XML I find it hard to find anything good or special in XML compared to SQL-based solutions. The XML-emperor has no clothes, or at most some light underware. There is a certain seduction in XML, that you don't have to do your homework beforehand (=data modelling) and you can just start working, but it is as useful as peeing in your pants in the frost. At first you will experience a warm feeling but in the end you will be far worse off.
Lauri Pietarinen Received on Mon Jul 04 2005 - 07:19:48 CEST