Michael Rys wrote: > > Dear James > > > 2. anyone can give a rundown on why they went for a diff technique > > rather than a direct pat specification with a replacement value? > > The scenarios that we tried to address were mid-tier caches that want to > synchronize with the database. Direct pat[h] specifications with replacement > values would not fit that well into these scenarios and would go more > towards an update language that would require a query language. that sounds more reasonable. i suppose i'd have to have read the scenariour to know how these caches were expected to behave, but i'm still surprised that one would want to work out a yet another addressing mechanism. > While XPath > could cover some aspects, we did not want to invent something in that space > before XML Query and its relationship to update languages is clear. well, sometimes it's hard not to. > > Please note that people can design their own XML update language in > conjunction with the OpenXML XML rowset provider inside T-SQL stored > procedures. > i was wondering 'cause i had done an update mechanism against an object database and found (for the large object case which im mentioned in the previous message) ended up using path-based adressing...
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format