<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">I don’t know anything about the MarkLogic implementation, but some of the key differences between XQuery 3.1 and the JSONiq proposal are:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">At the data model level:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* Maps can use any atomic value as the key, it does not have to be a string</div><div class="">* The members of an array are sequences, not necessarily items</div><div class="">* JSON’s null is represented as an empty sequence, not as a new atomic data type</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">At the syntax level:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* In XQ3.1, Map constructors use the syntax map{ a:b, c:d } rather than bare curlies</div><div class="">* XQ 3.1 introduces a lookup operator for maps and arrays: employee?name, or book?author?1</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There are many differences of detail, for example XQ3.1 allows an array to be atomized, so that sum() over an array does "the right thing”.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Of course these differences were all very hotly debated over a long period of time, and I wouldn’t even attempt to summarize the arguments.</div><br class=""><div apple-content-edited="true" class="">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">Michael Kay</div><div class="">Saxonica</div><div class=""><a href="mailto:mike@saxonica.com" class="">mike@saxonica.com</a></div><div class="">+44 (0) 118 946 5893</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 28 Apr 2015, at 18:15, daniela florescu <<a href="mailto:dflorescu@me.com" class="">dflorescu@me.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Dear Kurt (Cagle) <div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">on linkedin to the same answer bellow you answered me:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class="">"As I said, first glance says it's close, but I'm not completely up to date on the JSONIQ spec. I know when I talked to a key developer of mutual acquaintance, he indicated that he followed JSONIQ, but that was still while it was under development."</span></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Kurt, do you have now a better idea about the technical differences between the two JSOn query languages: JSONiq designed and supported by Zorba</div><div class="">and the one supported by MarkLogic ? </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Or does someone else ?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">What is the technical rationale for making the two languages different ? Any strong technical reasons ?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If there are no strong technical reasons, and the two are different just for the sake of being different, that's very sad. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Relational databases survived for 30 years because those guys were brilliant business people and </div><div class=""> understood the power of a standard/common language and common APIs for all vendors.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">It strengthens the (entire) community to the point that, even 30 years later, it is almost impossible to get SQL out of their hands....</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">It's very unfortunate that the NoSQL community, and especially MarkLogic who considers themselves the "leaders" in this market,</div><div class="">don't get that simple fact....and they had to twist JSONiq here and there in order to avoid admitting they use the language designed by the</div><div class="">Zorba community and avoid calling it JSONiq....</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Such a lack of vision is sad.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""> But I digress.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I am still curious if someone compiled a list of technical differences.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks, best regards</div><div class="">Dana</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Apr 23, 2015, at 5:24 PM, daniela florescu <<a href="mailto:dflorescu@me.com" class="">dflorescu@me.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">I heard that MarkLogic will be using JSONiq for processing JSON.<br class=""><a href="http://www.jsoniq.org/" class="">http://www.jsoniq.org</a><br class=""><br class="">Sounds like wonderful news to me.<br class=""><br class="">Hope it’s true.<br class=""><br class="">Best<br class="">Dana<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div>_______________________________________________<br class=""><a href="mailto:talk@x-query.com" class="">talk@x-query.com</a><br class="">http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>