RE: XPATH query Take 2

[Matthew MacKenzie <matt@xmlglobal.com>]

Fine by me.  XPath is easier to learn than QUILT, and I think XPath would do
just fine.  

Now for something different.....

Why wouldn't ebxml regrep simply define a set of calls which allow a
user/app to search for certain things?  The UDDI initiative did this with
their find_*() methods.  If the group were to do this, there would be no QL
holy war as vendors could use whatever technology that they are married to
to fulfill queries.  Vendors could extend the core to perform more complex
queries (they will anyway).

Comments?

-Matt

<<| message from: David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com> |>>
Message text written by INTERNET:matt@xmlglobal.com
> > 
> The work done in LDAP is certainly interesting, but what about something
> like QUILT.  AFAICS, QUILT uses XPath-like syntax which is useful on the
> document level context while adding functionality to bring it into the
same
> space as SQL.
> 
> JP: When you say "root context" what do you mean exactly?
> 
> Cheers,
> Matt
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> 
> Matt,
> 
> The problem is that QUILT is right at this precise second something
> we cannot comment on.
> 
> But since the W3C is actively working XML Query - and we anticipate
> results, certainly by Vienna, it is prudent to not box ourselves in.
> 
> So we have only XPath which is official. As an initial base to work
> from I really don't see any alternates.
> 
> My offer (similar to Len's) of a simple query semantic based on 
> parameters and XML was pooh-poohed as inventing a new
> query language (which it was not).   Rather a set of commonly
> used parameters to enable simplified access - regardless of
> the underlying query language on the backend.  This stuff is
> not rocket science - its just boolean logic expressed in 
> English keywords with XML tag targets.  I've built a couple of
> these already - the last one was for users at the Smithsonian
> to run magazine and photograph searches by clicking on 
> checkboxes and typing in search values to generate an
> iterative list of search terms.
> 
> Anyway - so that's why it looks like the only option is XPath - 
> which is a lot more complicated than what I saw as needed
> first pass here.
> 
> DW.
> 
> 
<<| end message from David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com> |>>

--
Matthew MacKenzie
VP Research & Development, Founder
XML Global Technologies, Inc.