• To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>, Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• Subject: RE: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:17:14 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

Amen.  Let's just be sure they are equivlent for the 
same requirements with some room to maneuver given 
the need for a performant db.  It's like normal forms 
in relational dbs:  a fully normalized db is an elegant 
thing, but may not perform.  So if someone issues a 
requirement for some feature the system can already 
handle, then it become the issuer's problem to justify 
the utility of the new feature.

len

From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@m...]

What I wish to avoid is having 5 different ways to do _everything_ because
that needlessly complicates XML.

• Prev by Date: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
• Next by Date: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
• Previous by thread: Applications of IDness: Get it from the storage system (Was RE: The XMLReader Interface, Chapter 7 of Processing XM L with Java)
• Next by thread: Re: IDs considered harmful or why keys might be better than IDs...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread