[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: XPATH query Take 2
The GMD-IPSI XQL Engine downloadable from http://xml.darmstadt.gmd.de/xql/
returns a NodeSet (called a NodeList) and supports the basic XQL/XPath syntax. You can use it with any DOM-compliant parser. Audree A. Thurman
Independent Technical Consultant & Educator
On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Frank G. Pitt wrote: > A query and some opinions on queries :
> > Firstly, I'd like to clarify something. > > I understood that XPath statements like the examples shown are designed only > to return the _first_ object that matches the criteria, and that there
is no
> easy way to get any more matches using XPath. > > At least, this is how XPath has worked in my usage of it so far, I have had > to write explicit tree walks, matching each node individually, to get more > than one match, as XPath "queries" have no 'history', so always returned the > same (first) match. > > Are there DOM implementations that will return a nodeset rather than a > single node in response to such a request ? > > If there aren't, then I don't see how XPath is a serious contender as a > query language, or that the XPath statements are, in fact, equivalents of > the OQL statements. > > > >
> I also think that the OQL syntax is far easier to understand in general, > though if that really is the most complicated query you're ever going to > use* it probably doesn't make much difference. > > (*it's a pretty simple one though, so be sure you don't need more. IME, > people always find they need more complicated queries further down the > track. ) > > > > I personallly feel the objection to the usage of OQL from certain parties is > commercially based rather than technically based*, because certain vendors > don't want to have to implement OQL to be compliant. I can see where they > are coming from, implementing OQL is a little harder**, but I don't agree > that an international standard should be compromised for the commercial gain > of a few small, but vociferous, vendors. > >
> (*I've seen no arguments that there is anything actually _wrong_ with using > OQL, merely claims that everything needed can be done using XPath, so why > bother with OQL ? ) > > (** But not a lot harder, all they need is a transform to translate OQL into > XPath, and then use the existing XPath engine. Should be simple if the > claims of XPath being equivalent to OQL are correct...) > > I'd also like to point out that XPath is _not_ the same thing as XML Query, > though XML Query _may_ make use of XPath syntax. Those arguing that we > should be sticking to XML standards should be arguing for support of XML > Query, not XPath, as XPath is _not_ the W3C's query recommendation for XML. > > Frankie > |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC