Re: native xml processing vs what Postgres and Oracle offer

From: paul c <>
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:05:05 GMT
Message-ID: <RWTYk.1450$yK5.1056_at_edtnps82>

Walter Mitty wrote:
> "paul c" <> wrote in message
> news:FnSYk.1428$yK5.5_at_edtnps82...

>> rpost wrote:
>> ...
>>> To which he replied: but a forum message is often a reply, and in that 
>>> case,
>>> a reply to a specific other message; this is not a presentation feature
>>> but a basic structural property of his forum (and of USENET as well);
>> For all we know, the OP's forum could be some idiosyncratic mutant, eg., 
>> one-user-at-a-time and synchronous.  I'd say it would be more useful to 
>> consider USENET.

> Why wouldn't it be more useful to respond to the OP? Are you trying to
> answer a question raised by the OP, in terms that make sense to the OP?
> Or are you trying to generalize the OP's question into one that is relevant
> across a largwer universe of messages?

I did reply to him in the first place. Suggested he was barking up the wrong tree by fastening on xml, what he called path enumeration and some difficulty he imagined to do with "enumerating long strings". I wish somebody had told me the same thirty years ago. Maybe he will see the forest, maybe he will not.

Looks like I was wrong about one thing, though. As far as the "larger universe" of this group is concerned, it seems the confusion of presentation with a model's underlying representation is more wide-spread than I thought. Received on Mon Dec 01 2008 - 17:05:05 CET

Original text of this message