Re: Re: Why REST was Re: URIs are simply names
2/17/2002 11:39:25 PM, "Gary Stephenson" <garys@i...> wrote: > >Absolutely. Date is right to insist that the data model be strongly-typed >(albeit dynamically so). We (er.. I ) already use RelaxNG and the XML >Schemas Datataypes for dynamically defining domains in our DBMS, over and >above for the "typing" of XML elements. I think there is great potential >there for a unified typed data model embracing both relations (RDBMS) and >trees (XML). Whether this data model could be usefully deployed generically >within REST is what I am trying to explore here. I see what you're getting at ... I don't know if REST would say anything one way or the other about this, after all it is just HTTP best practice not anything you can't do today. > >yup! Except that he'd actually like us to implement a relational database >the way _Date_ defined it! <g> This has always been my big problem with the >Third Manifesto stuff, as also with RDBMS systems in general. It would >seem that they are in fact impossible to implement! If not, then why hasn't >anyone - including Date and Fabian Pascal - yet done so? Well, I've learned the hard way that if you ask Fabian Pascal this question, he will rudely question your intelligence, education, experience, ... parentage, species <grin> ... but not offer a compelling answer. For what it is worth, there is supposedly a "stealth" company with a patent on a truly innovative database technology that will do all this with the assistance/blessing of Codd and Date. The only trace of them I've found on the internet is this help wanted ad: http://www.cppsig.org/guestbook/ [search for "Codd" within the page], and US Patent 6,009,432
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