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

RE: Storing Lots of Fiddly Bits (was Re: What is XML for?)

• From: Dave Winer <dave@u...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 09:24:32 -0800

Frontier has four different ways to access XML structures:

1. A native verbset, the xml verbs.

http://docserver.userland.com/xml/

2. An implementation of expat, supporting its own api.

http://www.techsoln.com/frontier/blox/index.html

3. A DOM implementation that works with either of the above.

http://www.tallent.com/frontier/DOM/default.html

4. XML-RPC, which can plug into Java, Python and Perl applications, with
more support on the way.

http://www.xmlrpc.com/

Dave

At 11:58 AM 1/30/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Paul Prescod wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "W. Eliot Kimber" wrote:
>... I suspect that the
>> > solution requires an entirely new way of thinking about storing little
>> > fiddly bits of data that is neither relational nor object nor
>> > object-relational, but is entirely else (or at least
>> significantly enough
>> > else to be something different).
>>
>> I think we have a definitional problem. I call anything that handles
>> "little fiddly graphs of data with links and annotations" an object
>> database. Is there someone in XML-DEV land with a better definition?
>> --
>	Object databases don't have any particular claim in this area. The current
>varieties seem more suited to work with particular languages (e.g. c++ or
>java). Oracle has announced an DOM interface in 8i, ObjectDesign  a DOM
>interface in eXcelon .. so, the only difference is how easy they are to work
>with and how fast they process specific tasks (oh ... and how much they cost
>:-)
>
>	I doubt there is much new under the sun. Back in circa 1981 I was working
>with a LISP derived language called Grasper (written by Dan Corkill) that
>was designed to represent and manipulate directed graphs. We used this to
>write a relational database which was used to process geneological (i.e.
>tree) data. so there you have it... you can do anything with anything, it
>just depends on how much work you want to do and how fast you want it to
>run.
>
>
>Jonathan Borden
>http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net
>
>
>xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
>Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
>To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
>(un)subscribe xml-dev
>To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
>subscribe xml-dev-digest
>List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
>
>


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: Storing Lots of Fiddly Bits (was Re: What is XML for?)
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • RE: Storing Lots of Fiddly Bits (was Re: What is XML for?)
    • From: "Borden, Jonathan" <jborden@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Another errata?
• Next by Date: Re: Is XML dead already or what? Was: RE: What is XML for?
• Previous by thread: RE: Storing Lots of Fiddly Bits (was Re: What is XML for?)
• Next by thread: Re: Storing Lots of Fiddly Bits (was Re: What is XML for?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread