• To: "'Hunsberger, Peter'" <Peter.Hunsberger@S...>, 'Gavin Thomas Nicol' <gtn@r...>, 'XML Developers List' <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:17:56 -0500

I agree with that.  It does have a graph model which is 
what I thought the question was.

Overloading schemas?  It raises the archforms question again, 
but the declarative techniques were simple.

We're noodling at solutions for which I'm not yet convinced 
there is a market, but this is XML-Dev and we are supposed 
to do that. 

len


From: Hunsberger, Peter [mailto:Peter.Hunsberger@S...]

Well RDF seems to be the answer that keeps popping up in this thread and
as I've said, I do think it's part of the answer.  I'm just not sure
it's the complete answer.  You've still got the problem of
addressability which then drags in ontologies or link bases.  As soon as
you drag in either of those you've got the problem of query mechanisms
and given the current state of the art and the amount of machinery you
need to manage and move around to handle all that I'm not sure you have
anything approaching a universal solution?

• Prev by Date: Re: More questions about conformance and entities
• Next by Date: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• Previous by thread: Re: After XQuery, are we done?
• Next by thread: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread