• To: "Jonathan Robie" <jonathan.robie@d...>,"Mike Champion" <mc@x...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Fwd: War of Attrition (was: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial))
• From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:19:33 -0700
• Thread-index: AcJkLcuIjwNWQpzvSHCBxzOxzbVuUAAgRmWw
• Thread-topic: Fwd: War of Attrition (was: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial))

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Robie 
> [mailto:jonathan.robie@d...] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 2:31 PM
> To: Mike Champion; xml-dev@l...

> 
> Strange, Ari first implies that the number of implementations 
> is a good indication of whether a specification is simple 
> enough, then implies that XQuery is not (presumably because 
> it only has around **15 ** implementations?). I don't think 
> XML 1.0, DOM Level 1, or XSLT had as many implementations as 
> XQuery now has, certainly not at the same stage of 
> development. And these implementations are certainly not all 
> from major vendors - including some of the better ones.

There aren't 15 implementations of XQuery in compliance with the current
family of specs and I doubt there ever will be given the degree of
complexity, inconsistency, underspecification and outright errors in the
current drafts. 

-- 
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM 
Self-made people have an abundance of working parts.        

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. 

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Fwd: War of Attrition (was: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial))
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Next by Date: Integration Models (WAS RE: parser models)
• Previous by thread: Re: XHTML 2.0: the one bright light?
• Next by thread: RE: Fwd: War of Attrition (was: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread