Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> -----Original Message----- > From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:rpbourret@r...] > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 4:35 PM > To: xml-dev@l... > Subject: Re: Caught napping! > > > > First, it's important to remember that native XML databases model XML > *documents*, not the data in those documents. That's an extremely good point ... > > Second, every native XML database defines two different models for an > XML document. I'd argue that a "native" XML database system presents a logical model that is "XML" and hides the physical model, if it is different; that's the differentiator between "native" and "XML-enabled" database systems. To just mention the examples I know best, the mapping of XML onto Tamino's internal data structures is more or less invisible to the user (except for indexing, which can't be expressed in XML-ese); the mapping of XML onto Oracle 9i tables is explicitly the responsibility of the database designer. > > In the long run, I think you will still see > a variety of physical models, but very few logical models, with all serious > players standardizing on XQuery's model. Similarly, I predict that an > ODBC-like interface (with XQuery playing the role of SQL) will be > standardized within a couple of years (XML:DB with XPath is > here today). I sure hope so! It would be interesting to hear from the MS and Oracle people on this point ... y'all seem to be holding your XQuery and/or SQLX cards kinda close to the vest <grin>
|
