• To: "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: RE: XQuery types was Re: Yet another plea for XUpdate...
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 13:17:43 -0500
• Cc: "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>

Correct.  Now, can someone assert that having XML conform 
to one might make that problem

1. Easier
2. Harder
3. Go away.
4. None of the above.

Will I also have XSD versions for 
each one of the three with some slight overlaps? 
And for each edge system to be integrated, the 
same problem?

Ummm.... SOAP/RPC looks better and better.

len


From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]

On Wed, 2002-05-08 at 14:02, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> Urr... that list I posted was in my queue specifically 
> because we have to worry about precisely that.  For any 
> vendor that sells in different market tiers, it becomes 
> necessary to use different backend database system with 
> different price break options.   In our case, we have 
> to support three different backend relational systems, 
> and if XML obligates us to datatype definitions, four.

And you've been unable to convince the backend vendors to conform to a
single type system?

Alas.

• Prev by Date: RE: XQuery types was Re: Yet another plea forXUpdate...
• Next by Date: Re: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing and markup)
• Previous by thread: RE: XQuery types was Re: Yet another plea for XUpdate...
• Next by thread: RE: Semantics was Re: XQuery types ...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread