On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 05:22:31PM -0500, Michael Bacarella wrote:
> > > > XML will become a common and powerful way to express/exchange data
> > > > on the web. I hope MySQL decides to go along for the ride.
> > >
> > > This is all fine and good, but why does MySQL itself have to do this?
> > >
> > We don't want Microsoft and Oracle to take over the world, do we? :)
>
> Their popularity does not imply sound design. Just that they have
> superior marketing.
>
SQLServer and Oracle both have superior functionality to MySQL.
I'm not enough of an expert to impune their design. They do,
however, get the job done quite nicely.
> > > My naive understanding is that it would be effortless to write a module
> > > in perl that translates the data returned by the DBI to XML.
>
> > I'm not a perl expert so I cannot speak to that. However, I doubt that
> > it's effortless or trivial.
>
> Why would it be easier to write said layer if it was inside the DBMS
> instead of outside?
>
Speed is the reason to have it in the RDBMS.
My point is that XML is coming and it's a good thing. MySQL
is an important part of the Open Source community and I
don't want to see it trivialized or handicapped in relation
commercial RDBMS. In the meantime, I'm willing to recommend
it to clients and wait patiently for increased functionality.
--
Regards,
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
