Re: What is the logic of storing XML in a Database?

On 2007-03-29, Marshall <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 28, 11:23 pm, Bernard Peek <b..._at_alpha.shrdlu.com> wrote:
>>
>> Can I turn this around and ask you what you think XML would look like if it
>> was more elegant?
>
> Binary.

Yes, if I had my way the data would be binary.

> Simpler: no distinction between entities and attributes, for example.

XML does allow multiple ways of representing attributes of entities but I think the distinction is necessary.

> It would have a type system.

XML has a type system. In fact it *is* a type system.

> It would have *one* way of representing schema

OK

> Schema would be embedded

I would be happy with a system that had that option, but for my purposes the external schema is a requirement. I need to know that the data in the file has been validated, as far as possible, against one specific instance of the schema. Being validadted against its own internal schema may be useful but is not sufficient.

> Relational support

One of the advantages of XML is that it can encode data from multiple tables, and the relationships between them. That is the reason why it is possible to use an XML file as the storage format for a multiple table database. (Whether it is a sensible thing to do is a different issue.)

But a hypothetical data transefer format should also be capable of encoding data using object-oriented and hierarchical data too.

>
>
> That's just off the top of my head.

It's a good starting point.

>
> Marshall
>
>
>

-- 
bap_at_shrdlu.com
In search of cognoscenti