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

Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?

• To: Daniela Florescu <dflorescu@m...>
• Subject: Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
• From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
• Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:18:47 +0000
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <A3ACB376-48E0-11D9-85AB-000393DC762C@m...>
• References: <200412021353.iB2DrTY07085@s...> <e3a5cb2c0412020657334e5a37@m...> <41AF34F0.7030507@d...> <1102362609.3885.7.camel@marge> <A3ACB376-48E0-11D9-85AB-000393DC762C@m...>
• Reply-to: davep@d...

On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 22:16 -0800, Daniela Florescu wrote:
> > 1. Xquery is not XML
> 
> I was always puzzled by this argument that people use in
> favor of XSLT and against XQuery.
> 
> First, please let me remember you that XSLT is not XML
> in it's entirety EITHER. Do you forget that the path
> expressions remain unparsed strings  and appear as
> attribute values !?

I *think* attributes are still part of XML?
I believe XSLT... or the stylesheets I've seen,
are well formed XML too. 




> 
> For me this dual representation of XSLT (half pre-parsed XML,
> half unparsed strings) doesn't bring any advantage.
For one, I can generate it with xslt,
and I can parse it using XML tools. 
I think that's an advantage.


> 
> I love the *semantics* of templates in XSLT. I find it really useful.
> But I would prefer to also have an angle brackets free syntax for it.

I'm sure someone will or has written a round bracket form of XSLT.



> 
> As such (with the current XSLT syntax) it makes it harder for me
> as a developer (I tend to dislike programming with angle brackets
> --- it's not readable enough), and due to the fact it is XML only half 
> way,
> it doesn't make it easier for automatic processing either.

I guess I'm the opposite. Most people I've come across prefer the rnc
format of relax-ng, I prefer the rng format. 


> 
> So Dave, we had this argument a couple of times, and I never understood
> your answer: what exact benefit do you get from the the fact that XSLT 
> is
> represented in it's current XML syntax ?
> 
> And why don't you get the same benefits from XQueryX (the pure XML
> variant of XQuery) ?

I am fairly familiar with XML processing. I generate and process
XSLT as XML instances.

I don't get the benefits from XQueryX because,
very simply,
I've never used it.
Never found a use for it,
and ... I guess, 
am very unlikely to use it..
 unless I find a use for an XML database, in which case couldn't I use
XSLT?


regards DaveP 
  

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
    • From: Daniela Florescu <dflorescu@m...>

• References:
  • What niche is XQuery targeting?
    • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
  • Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
    • From: Michael Champion <michaelc.champion@g...>
  • Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
  • Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
  • Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
    • From: Daniela Florescu <dflorescu@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XSLT syntax (was: Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?)
• Next by Date: Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
• Previous by thread: RE: What niche is XQuery targeting?
• Next by thread: Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread