Duh. I meant, go with (1)
:)
--- Bryan Field-Elliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Good advice -- but when you said, "I'd go with (2)",
> did you actually
> mean, "I'd go with (1)"? Everything else you've said
> would indicate
> thus.
Hi,
I'd go with (2) which is the approach I took with
SiXDML. I chose that for a number of reasons,
a.) Faster ramp up time to learn APIs than learn how
internals work.
b.) Less dependance on internals of DB will mean that
it less resistant to changes in the implementation
since APIs typicall
--- Kimbro Staken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The one problem I do see with it is that it changes
> the concept of the
> Database. In the current API you shouldn't be using
> the database instance
> for anything beyond the initial setup. If we move
> logic like getService
> into it then you'll
--- Tom Bradford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 02:09 PM, Kimbro
> Staken wrote:
> > The problem comes if there is no root collection.
> For instance I have
> > an Oracle 9i impl where the collection hierarchy
> is flat. I had to
> > synthesize a root collection i
--- Tom Bradford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * As Dare Obasanjo already mentioned the tying of
> services to
> > collections is not very practical. I think this is
> definitly something
> > that should be changed.
>
> I disagree. A Service is a Collection
- Original Message -
From: "Kimbro Staken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> There's a big difference between stating a respectful opinion and stating
> an disrespectful opinion. Disrespe
In addition I'd suggest that somewhere in the API a
QName[] getSupportedTypes( ) ;
is added as well as an error code be added in ErrorCodes such as
UNSUPPORTED_RESOURCE_TYPE
which can be one of the specified error codes when an XMLDBException is thrown
from a
Collection#storeResour
er smarter than I am.
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Borden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> > - Original Message -
>
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Borden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> Exactly, the XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 data models have merged. If XML:DB is
> really going to be the standar
w3c data model doc). It
> may be wise to adopt this as a valid value in the xmldb API as well. In
> this light, I would use the word Value instead of Resource.
>
> cheers
> jim
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Borden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> Err, so "addResource" on a BinaryResource is OK _from an interface point of
> view_ when "addResource" on an
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Borden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
>
> so? you also cannot store a book where SQL expects an int.
>
Now I'm confused.
What _good_ RDBMS API hav
- Original Message -
From: "Kimbro Staken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> You're right in many cases that won't make sense, that doesn't have to be
> the case though. The resource insta
>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>
> >
> > From the point of view of an implementor the XPathService returns
> Resources
> > within ResourceSets and this is way t
6:46 -0700
> Kimbro Staken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Thursday, January 10, 2002, at 11:04 PM, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > From the point of view of an implementor the XPathService returns
> > > Resources
> > > w
- Original Message -
From: "Kimbro Staken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> > It seems that somewhere along the line whoever designed the XML:DB API
> > decided
16 matches
Mail list logo
