RE: Review of thoughts on Ad Hoc Queries

[David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Message text written by "joebaran@extol.com"
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The query syntax DOES NOT prescribe the implementation!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I don't think we can have a meaningful vote until everyone takes a deep 
breath and lets this sink in.

OR - does anyone actually still believe that the syntax DOES prescribe the 
implementation?

If so, please explain.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Joe,

That bit I agree with.  However this - I do not agree that the query syntax
itself is benign.

Here in lies the rub.  The more the query syntax allows - the more this
forces the backend implementation (whatever) to have to jump thru 
hoops to achieve, and then by extension - the more likely you are
that different implementations will give inconsistent results.

Even with SQL databases you see this! (I have the scars to prove it!).

Further more - since this is ebXML - my premise would be that the
default is a XML based query syntax of some form as most of the
content can be expected to be XML too.  Therefore I expect to
use your query 'as is' - not having to morph it at all - and that way
you get more exact precision and ability to support the family
of XML (schema, RDF, XSLT, and so on down the list).

Therefore - in selecting a simple XML based system I am
significantly shortening the pieces of string for most vendors and
users.  This is the multiplier that XML brings.  Tools are written to 
support XML, the registry is implemented in the tools.  You know
how to use XML tehcniques so there is nothing new to learn.
That  also just makes less extensions people need to develop and
longer term enhances your ability to take advantage of new XML 
based goodies as they come along.

DW.