Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XSLT and XQuery
 At 11:42 AM 1/5/2002 +0000, Sean McGrath wrote: >At 18:43 04/01/2002 -0500, Jonathan Robie wrote: > >>2. It may be very interesting to think about the potential benefits of >>integrating XSLT and XQuery. If there is a compelling benefit to >>integrating the languages, we should consider doing so after the release >>of XQuery 1.0. > >Doesn't doing so *after* the release of XQuery 1.0 just create a legacy >problem and just make things worse >for everyone (except possibly vendors who get a free churn)? It's not clear to me that there is a compelling need for XSLT and XQuery to be the same language, or that a unified language would be a better language than the two individual languages are. Asking XQuery to integrate with XSLT already creates a legacy problem that did not exist beforehand. XQuery was designed with different design goals, and XSLT already exists. It makes no sense to say at this point, after a WG has been designing a language since 1999, that this language should not proceed because it must be unified with a different language. A Working Group needs to be able to say what is in scope and what is not in scope for its work, and integrating XQuery with XSLT was never in scope. >Why rush? Who is rushing and why? As a user, I want something small, simple to >understand, that works. I don't mind if it does not unify the Universe >into one cohesive theory. I'd like >that but I can wait for it. If a bunch of smart people advise that we >should re-visit some core >data model issues before layering on more standards, so be it. In fact, >I'd be delighted because >it would show concern for the deep longevity we are all seeking in data >standards. I think that the data model issues and the type issues are of central importance, and we need to make sure we have these nailed in XQuery 1.0. For me, these are the highest priority. Note that the data model and type system *are* shared by XPath 2.0, XQuery, and XSLT. This is important. Making XQuery and XSLT the same language, on the other hand, does not seem as important, especially if it imposes real compromises on either language. I use both Java and C++, which have strong similarities and all kinds of subtle differences, but I have never wanted the two languages to be unified. >"Standards" should not be rushed. They should take as long as they take. >Especially when >they are as complex, far-reaching and require innovation as XQuery does. I think that we should have clear criteria for when a standard is finished. For instance, I think that multiple compatible, independently developed implementations should be required, public comment should be adequately addressed, etc. This is analogous to saying that a programming project should plan to pass quality assurance. However, it is rarely said that a programming project "should take as long as it takes". There should be clear requirements, with criteria for determining whether the requirements have been met, and a schedule should be developed for meeting those requirements. The cost of developing any standard should not be unbounded, and people joining a standards effort should have some idea when their work can come to fruition, so they can justify their time to the companies for which they work. In general, a standards effort, like a programming project, should resist having their scope and requirements redefined, especially in late stages of their effort. It is hard to hit a moving target. There are exceptions. The XML Query WG has already been cooperating with the XSL WG to create a unified data model and to unify XPath 2.0 and XQuery, and we are cooperating on the type system and grammar. I think that cooperation has been important, slow work, but it is paying off. There were clear reasons that this work should have been done before XQuery 1.0 was released. I do not see the same compelling need to unify the syntax of XSLT and XQuery. They are different languages. The fact that two different languages have different syntaxes does not bother me. Jonathan 
|
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
|
|||||||||
