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

RE: Access XML

• To: "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Access XML
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:54:26 -0600

That's straightforward.  The extensions don't scare me. 
I have to document three different sets of database 
types for every release of our code using Foxpro, 
Oracle, and SQL server.  Trivial stuff.  On the 
other hand, a schema of that level of detail isn't 
telling one a lot.  When they start keeping libraries 
of regular expressions (eg, the common guys like Zip codes 
or even that ISBN) and controlled vocabularies (eg, list 
of postal codes for US, for Canada, etc), and enabling 
the user to configure these for enumerated code lists, 
that will be very cool.  But the schema as provided 
is a pretty good place to start.  As always, the more 
one details a schema, the narrower the 
application.  Tim is right about the namespaces, 
of course, but they don't get much use here anyway.
It will be something of a shock to some of our programmers 
when they have to.

One thing to comment on in your writing:  it is easy 
to use delimited ASCII for these.  Why would one want 
to use XML?

len

From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]

<decloak>
I'm busily writing about Microsoft Office 2003 and its new XML options.
</decloak>

There's lots of interesting stuff here, though it's a pretty mixed bag.
I'd like to hear what people think of the XML, and I suspect this list
is the best place to expose the angle brackets.  I'll start with what's
probably the friendliest of the Office XML, if not the one people are
talking about most: Microsoft Access.  

I'm still sorting out its import capabilities, but here's what an export
from a three-table query looks like:

• Prev by Date: Re: Access XML
• Next by Date: Excel XML
• Previous by thread: Access XML
• Next by thread: RE: Access XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread