Re: Updated Constrained OQL proposal

[Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@east.sun.com>]

Matthew,

We have looked at XPATH in more detail than you realize.

It seems that you have not read

http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-regrep/200101/msg00098.html

Otherwise you would know that we have spent a fair amount of time exploring the
XPATH option based on my efforts. The following message includes the fruits of
my own labour in this area with sampel dcouments and sampel XSLT style sheets.

http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-regrep/200101/msg00041.html

It would improve our signal to noise ratio if you can catch up with your RR
reading. Thanks


Matthew MacKenzie wrote:

> <fn>
> Short answer I forgot to mention is that no there is no such explicit
> requirement that the query syntax be mappable to SQL. However I do see the
> following requirements:
>
> 1. Easy to use and familiar syntax for clients
> 2. Based on a standard
> 3. Able to make use of RIM attributes and methods to perform the kind of
> queries exemplified in:
>
> http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-regrep/200101/msg00098.html
> </fn>
>
> I would argue that an XML-specific query language such as XPath would
> satisfy 1 & 2, and 3 could be met easily by
> allowing AND & OR to be used to concatenate XPath statements, e.g.
>
> /granddad/dad[1]/kid[@name = "tim"] AND /granddad/dad[2]/kid[@name = "bob"]
>
> There are freely available XPath implementations that people could use to
> achieve the above.  I feel the above is a better solution than using
> OQL/SQL, but I stil don't like it because it explicity defines the actual
> query mechanism.  I would rather see an interface which allows the
> implementer to select what query/storage mechanism is used.  The obvious
> solution to me is to forget this notion of "adhoc queries", and instead
> implement more methods on the registry.  Currently, there are a bunch of
> get*() methods defined, how about defining a bunch of find*() methods, and
> skirt the QL issue like they have done in UDDI.  I know that if OQL/SQL is
> used today, we will regret it tomorrow - especically when XML Query produces
> something.
>
> <fn>
> Just curious. How does XML Global store metadata for their registry?
> </fn>
>
> Can't you guess?  We have our own native XML database that uses QUILT as its
> QL.  This really is immaterial, however - we could easily support OQL if we
> had to, it is just wrong in my mind, as the metadata is defined in XML.
>
> The find*() approach will certainly scratch your OO itch, so what is the
> problem with that idea?
>
> :-P
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matt
>
> BTW Sorry about mis-spelling your name.
>
> Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
>
> > Farrukh,
> >
> > Is "mapping to SQL" a requirement of regrep adhoc query?  Your proposal
> > stinks of technology bias, and I hope the group recognizes that.
> >
> > --
> > Matthew MacKenzie
> > VP Research & Development
> > XML Global Technologies, Inc.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:Farrukh.Najmi@east.sun.com]
> > Sent: January 11, 2001 6:15 AM
> > To: ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org
> > Subject: Updated Constrained OQL proposal
> >
> > Attached is an update to the previous document on my brain dump on ad
> > hoc queries.
> >
> > The changes are:
> >
> > -Much more examples on the types of queries IMHO need to be supported
> > -Now uses attribute names rather than accessor method names wherever
> > possible
> > -Added section on mapping OQL to SQL
> >
> > I look forward to your comments.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Farrukh
>
> --
> Regards,
> Farrukh

--
Regards,
Farrukh

begin:vcard 
n:Najmi;Farrukh
tel;work:781-442-0703
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.sun.com
org:Sun Microsystems;Java Software
adr:;;1 Network Dr. MS BUR02-302;Burlington;MA;01803-0902;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:najmi@east.sun.com
fn:Farrukh Najmi
end:vcard