XQuery as a general data processing language WAS: [xquery-talk]
XQuery and Web 2.0
pc.subscriptions at gmail.com
Sat Apr 26 01:48:29 PDT 2008
Sure...no disagreement here....perhaps that just means that a "general
data processing language" as is the subject of this thread is not
If mainstream adoption of XQuery is what we all care about in this
discussion (and I might be confusing web 2 mashups, as originally
intended, with mainstream here), I still think that better integration
in your more typical application environment (which for better or
worse looks like it will be oo based for the coming years) is going to
Applications like Markmail or whatever other killer app one comes up
with is a necessary trigger to get the attention of the average
buzzword allergic and essentially lazy developer, but I doubt that
you'll keep their attention once they find out what things they have
to go through to take an XQuery result and integrate it in their
familiar environment (or vice versa).
What do you think about e.g. LINQ which from what I understand of it
seem to try and deal with this integration/mismatch problem? Would
that not better fit better under the "general data processing"
On 26 Apr 2008, at 00:23, Jason Hunter wrote:
> Peter Coppens wrote:
>> If XQuery has the ambition to become a general (data) processing
>> language it will have to integrate (or work) seamlessly with <your
>> preferred oo programming language> object model.
> I see XQuery as a general _content_ processing language. Emails are
> content. So are books, magazines, tutorials, lesson plans, flight
> manuals, governmental records, IRS filings, and so on.
> These things fit poorly into a classical object model.
> Question: How do you model a mixed content article in Java?
> Answer: Not very effectively. :)
> Most people think of content as something you hold as a blob and
> access via its metadata or simple textual search. If instead you
> think of content as a rich description language, then you will see
> the world like we do on MarkMail. It's about content, not data.
> And putting Java in the picture would be a royal pain because mixed
> content things like email aren't nearly as effectively modeled in
> Java as they are in XML.
> This is why Daniela is onto something. Most Web 2.0 apps are
> content apps, not data apps.
More information about the talk