[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: SML ignored? Re: XPath 1.5? (was RE: t

• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: SML ignored? Re: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing andmarkup)
• From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
• Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 02:54:26 -0700
• References: <2W2198ECWQ051TTSEB8395XTPOK6ZPN.3cdc0734@MChamp>

Mike Champion wrote:
> It's the 750-page "standards" that are generally ignored in the long run.
> 
> [actual counter-examples welcomed ...has any "standard" anywhere near as long
> as XQuery / XPath2, except for one that exhaustively details existing
> practice, been the basis for widespread interoperability ?  ]

ODBC, although you might say that this codified existing practice.

I don't have a copy of the 1.0 spec any more, but 2.0 is around 700
pages. One thing to note is that, in spite of this size, the relative
complexity is probably less than that of XQuery / XPath2.

One thing that probably aided both implementation and use was
conformance levels. Although 2.0 contains around 50 functions, only 20
were in the core conformance level -- a manageable number to learn,
especially since half of these provided very simple functionality
(allocate or delete a connection, commit or roll back a transaction,
etc.)

-- Ron

• References:
  • SML ignored? Re: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing andmarkup)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Next by Date: Re: frustration (was RE: XPath 2.0 )
• Previous by thread: SML ignored? Re: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing andmarkup)
• Next by thread: RE: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing and markup)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread