Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
The only thing I'd add is that there is no requirement that these be Web-based. For example, the XML:DB API provides a vehicle for sending queries and receiving results. It also seems that type 2 includes lots of useful things like QPath and XQuery expressions, so it's hardly retrograde. In fact, non-XML based query languages are likely to be a lot clearer in a lot of cases that XML-based ones. -- Ron Leigh Dodds wrote: > > I've been musing on something lately, and wondered if > this has occured to anyone else... > > There seems to be several types of 'query' interfaces at > the moment. i.e. a simple request/response interaction > with a server. > > -- > > Type 1. Web based, non XML > > The standard HTTP based querying that's been around for > years. Query parameters encoded as GET/POST, with response > in protocol specific format > > Type 2. Web based, XML response > > Again querying is based on HTTP, parameters encoded > as GET/POST, with response(s) in XML. > > Type 3. Web based, XML request/response > > XML document based query interface (e.g. XML-RPC, > SOAP over HTTP), and XML response > > Type 4. Protocol neutral, XML request/response > > The high end. Protocol agnostic. E.g SOAP. > > -- > > Does anyone think this is a useful classification?
|
