----- 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 standard API for XML databases, we need to track this > work. That said, what is important is what we can do with 'it' not whether > 'it' is named 'Value' or 'Resource'. > > The current XML:DB API and Model is good. We can simply subclass the > Resource class as has been intended from day 1. IMHO, this is *not* the right decision. A Resource is supposed to be a type the database knows how to store/manage. The results of an XPath query are a _superset_ of the types that an XML database should know how to store. Clinging onto "XPath query results = = Resource" is sentimentalism and does not make for a well designed API. It is a choice that will lead to many users of the API shooting themselves in the foot and lots of exceptions at runtime (the worst kind) as people realize that not all implementors of the Resource interface are actually resources. A better solution would be to design support for XQuery/XPath 2.0 types and make sure that the types that correspond to nodes/nodesets/complexTypes implement the XMLResource interface. -- THINGS TO DO IF I BECOME AN EVIL OVERLORD #59 I will never build a sentient computer smarter than I am. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact administrator: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------
