• To: XML DEV <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
• From: David Megginson <david@m...>
• Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:11:51 -0500
• In-reply-to: <3E635BC1.C363E559@f...>
• References: <E18oMGa-0005t3-00@m...><p04330102ba83b5f45841@[192.168.254.4]><02ff01c2e14f$9d880bc0$6401a8c0@tbp1><3E630C7D.7080906@t...><15971.20891.679398.75447@m...><3E635BC1.C363E559@f...>

W. E. Perry writes:

 > This seems like the converse of XQuery: i.e., instead of an XML
 > view over a relational database, an application-specific mapping
 > for instantiating the parse of an XML instance to a relational
 > schema.

I don't know if I'd take a strictly relational approach for an XML
data layer.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, david@m..., http://www.megginson.com/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
    • From: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@f...>

• References:
  • Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
  • Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
    • From: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
• Next by Date: RE: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
• Previous by thread: Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
• Next by thread: Re: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread