Re: WWW/Internet 2009: 2nd CFP until 21 September

From: Walter Mitty <wamitty_at_verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 20:27:00 GMT
Message-ID: <oSEhm.2274$Jg.611_at_nwrddc01.gnilink.net>


"rpost" <rpost_at_pcwin518.campus.tue.nl> wrote in message news:h66okg$2svb$3_at_mud.stack.nl...
> rpost wrote:
>
>>Walter Mitty wrote:
>>
>>>I have scanned the first few paragraphs of the article you cited. I
>>>admit
>>>that I haven't read it all, or any of it carefully.
>>>
>>>from the little I did read it seems clear to me that the originators of
>>>XML
>>>THINK that they have come up with a view of data that covers all of the
>>>same
>>>ground the the relational view of data covers. Or it's just possible
>>>that
>>>they never heard of the relational view of data. But just because they
>>>think that doesn't mean that you and I should think that.
>>
>>All the author claims is that relational and XML-based representations
>>map to each other. This is true; such mapping can be done automatically.
>>But that doesn't mean the representations are equivalent: some things
>>are easier to do in one representation than in the other. I do think
>>the author should have given more prominence to the role of schema,
>>query and data manipulation languages.
>
> Yikes. I meant the author of the *other* article,
>
> http://www.tdan.com/view-articles/5183
>
> --
> Reinier

OK. This articles looks like its worth reading for understanding, even though it's going to take me a long time.

The article presupposes some knowledge on the reader's part that I lack. Received on Sat Aug 15 2009 - 15:27:00 CDT

Original text of this message