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

RE: After XQuery, are we done?

• To: "Elliotte Harold" <elharo@m...>
• Subject: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• From: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter.Hunsberger@S...>
• Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:20:03 -0500
• Cc: "XML Developers List" <xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcS7boQgx5mwmLXBR+6vi6sxi3GtAAAABPnw
• Thread-topic: After XQuery, are we done?

Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...> writes:
> 
> Hunsberger, Peter wrote:
> 
> 
> > Which still leaves the original question; once you've got a way of 
> > managing and manipulate graphs, why would you need a way to 
> > distinguish trees?  What does recognizing the special case get you?
> 
> Because some things are true of trees which are not true of 
> all graphs, 
> the algorithms to process them can be made simpler and/or faster. For 
> instance, you can do a depth first search or breadth first search 
> without worrying about cycle detection.
> 

That's exactly my point, if we ever got to the point where we could
manage graphs (in general) I don't think you'd need to care about trees
anymore.  Internally, software might optimize the management of all
kinds of special cases (not just trees), but if we've got Michaels
non-instance specific network exchange capability then at an interface
level you shouldn't care anymore?

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: After XQuery, are we done?
    • From: Rick Marshall <rjm@z...>
  • Re: After XQuery, are we done?
    • From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RELAX NG pluggable type libraries
• 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