As I understand it, XML:DB serves two key functions. One is to build a spec, the other is to help create the market for XML databases. The second objective won't be met until there are practical and usable drivers available to build apps. So, I am in agreement with Kimbro and Ronald that there should be focus on building usable drivers without loosing sight of the first objective, building a solid and scalable spec.
__________________________ Jason Barney [EMAIL PROTECTED] __________________________ > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Ronald Bourret > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 9:34 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: How should the API develop > > > Kimbro Staken wrote: > > > The reason I'm asking is because there has been very little activity > > based on the last draft that was posted. I expected that to at least > > spark some comment or maybe even cries of outrage but it has been very > > quiet instead. > > Sorry about that -- nothing is worse than complete silence. > > I'm usually so busy that I only have time for localized bursts of > activity on XML:DB. I've only had time to glance at the latest draft, > but it looked reasonable to me. I'll try to look closely later this > week. > > > I'll state the current goal of the API is to provide the ability to > > build applications that can move easily from one vendors product to > > another. > > Exactly. > > > Now times have changed a lot since both ODBC and JDBC were developed and > > Open Source has become a very viable way of developing software to > > achieve the same goal. An example of this would be Perl DBI and SAX. > > Actually, both SAX and ODBC were developed in the same way XML:DB was > developed: iterative work on the spec and implementations by a number of > different vendors, until enough experience was gained to label the spec > 1.0. > > > So > > what I wanted to throw out was the question of would it be of more value > > to us to focus more on implementation and less on specification? > > I think so. If we get several different implementations over several > different databases, it should ferret out any problems. > > > What I > > mean is should the output of this project be not only a driver manager > > and specification but also the drivers? One stated goal of XML:DB is to > > develop specs and reference implementations of those specs so this isn't > > inconsistent. > > I don't think the project itself needs to be a delivery vehicle for > drivers. I think it just needs to deliver the spec and any common code, > such as the driver managers in JDBC or ODBC. However, I do think that > drivers need to be written. A spec without implementations to prove it > is not useful. > > > We're so early in the XML database game and everyone's implementations > > are so immature and so different that a comprehensive spec is going to > > be very difficult to develop. Basically I'm thinking a simple usable API > > with a few drivers in 3 months is much more valuable then waiting a year > > for us to fully detail a spec and then get some initial implementations. > > Agreed. > > One useful measure of success is getting a handful (three to five) of > independently-written applications to work with a handful > independently-written of drivers. If we can do this, then I'd say we > have a pretty useable spec. > > -- Ron > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Contact adminstrator: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact adminstrator: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------
