• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>,"Gavin Thomas Nicol" <gtn@r...>,"XML Developers List" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• From: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter.Hunsberger@S...>
• Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:17:05 -0500
• Thread-index: AcS6qL8eoLlTwxwcSxCwLH8BMEZgwwABImtA
• Thread-topic: After XQuery, are we done?

Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@i...> writes:
> 
> That would be RDF.
> 
> len
> 
> 
> From: Hunsberger, Peter [mailto:Peter.Hunsberger@S...]
> 
> <opinion type="myopic mathematical bias"> 
> 
> The way I see it, the real question in this thread is how do 
> we move from exchanging limited hierarchical models 
> represented in XML towards exchanging some more universal 
> graph representations? 
> 
> </opinion>
 
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: XML Data Modellling/Linking (was RE: AfterXQuery, are we done?)
• 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