Murray Altheim wrote:
> XNode was designed to be (a) simple, and (b) not require any changes
> whatsoever to Xindice or XML:DB. It's certainly possible to create an
> entire metadata layer/level and add complexity to Xindice (or XML:DB),
> but I felt that the best approach was something that was an add-on
> layer, something that could be ignored if unwanted, not extra baggage.
I wouldn't call the ability to cache a database 'extra baggage' and I
wouldn't personally trust a database which design isn't designed to
include basic metadata.
Sure your XNode proposal is a step in the right direction, but why
should be we shy in going down that road if it makes the system more
useful and better integrated with existing systems?
> It certainly could be used for either application- or database-level
> metadata, depending on how the metadata is designed (ie., XNode can be
> easily extended by adding either attribute or element content to its
> <xnode:Header> element.
>
> I specifically didn't want to reinvent SOAP (which is hardly "simple"
> anymore, with new extensions coming out each month).
Neither did I.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
