[xquery-talk] [xml-dev] Mistakes made in the design of XQuery 3.1
ihe.onwuka at gmail.com
Thu May 28 14:23:48 PDT 2015
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:17 PM, daniela florescu <dflorescu at me.com> wrote:
>> XQuery was baptized XQuery around 2001, when no JSON was around (yet)….
> No Java was ……
> Java had at that time it’s own query language, actually made by some
> people originally involved with XQuery.
But they didn't call it JQuery, so the name was still available
>> True that JSON was created later in the same year 2001, however it did
>> not become widely popular
>> about until much later.
> ....but Java was already very very popular.
> Now supposing an individual had cobbled together a language in 10 days
> that was so crap that it's leading protagonist actually had to write a book
> highlighting it's good parts. Read the first paragraph here.
> Imagine if they left the name as LiveScript or ECMAScript and note in the
> last sentence of paragraph 1 why they didn’t.
> That’s funny and interesting from a historical point of view.
> But that’s water under the bridge.
It proves that when it comes to IT you can put lipstick on a pig. If you
were trying to name the language today JShit would probably market test
better than XQuery.
This is the discipline supposedly grounded in logic, but you know the
saying - "The Cobblers children are always the worst shod".
> The question for me is what could XQuery — and all the hard years of heavy
> experience that we all acquired in querying and processing, indexing, etc
> for schema-less data during 18 years — bring to the world of NoSQL query
> languages, which, today, is pretty pathetic.
We are in an age where people who never knew what it was like before SQL (I
really should say RDBMS) are making decisions on database architecture.
Remember this (I got it from your linkedin feed)
I read it and thought DUHHHHH!!!!! but I knew it would be eulogized by
other readers (sure enough look in the comments). That's the world we are
The things you talk about with XQuery solve problems that todays architects
don't know they have. People are busy latching onto NoSQL performance
benchmarks, without having a clue of the price that was extracted to get
those figures. Because the understanding of many developers today does not
go much deeper than the manipulation of syntax NoSQL vendors can get away
with passing these huge compromises off as a virtue ("We don't support
joins, isn't that great").
Maybe it's because of your abhorrence of stupidity you tend not to stick
around long enough to witness just how stupid some people are.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk