AW: XQuery frameworksDavid Lee dlee at calldei.com
Tue Feb 2 07:42:40 PST 2010
You might want to look at xmlsh which was designed to solve this problem of managing the efficient interactions of many xqueries (as well as may non-xquery XML and non-xml pieces of a larger integration), although perhaps not in the way you express. ---------------------------------------------------- David A. Lee http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk http://www.calldei.com http://www.xmlsh.org -------------------------------------------------- From: "Hans-Juergen Rennau" <http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 6:49 PM To: <http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk> Cc: <http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk> Subject: AW: XQuery frameworks > Liam, > > 'extend standardization "beyond the query"' - that is an excellent > formula, I think! As one of the reasons why the need is real I regard the > challenge of data integration. I have a feeling that there is a remarkable > contradiction between potential and reality. XQuery has a great potential > as an integrator, what with the possibility to just *name* the resource > (URI) and immediately have its structured content under your fingertips. > But if the actual usage of XQuery does not yet live up to the potential, > one of the reasons may be that it is difficult to set up a system of many > queries to a robust whole, although the *single* queries can be written so > easily and efficiently. Put differently: it makes a great difference if > the focus of integration lies within a single query, or beyond. > > A movement "beyond the query": how about a processing model just one level > above the query level, of moderate complexity, integrating the execution > of single queries, for example by assigning to them properties which would > allow to automate their squencing, input provision and output delivery? > The XQuery spec provides for the possibility to write library modules, but > it is not possible to formulate relationships between library functions. > In general, we cannot say someting "about" a function. We cannot, for > example, express that a query Q has a "logical" source document D, > although the actual input is not (or not only) D itself, but the result > produced by some other query Q0, likewise logically - or perhaps > literally - processing D. A really simple XML language might make it > clear that the command "apply Q to D" would have to be expanded by a > framework into a chain: "apply Q0 to D, resulting in R; present Q to R". > We do not have this level of > abstraction which would allow for orchestrating the individual queries. > The XQuery language level knows only XDM values and expressions. I wonder > if just one level above the language a simple, standardized processing > model might not be possible, simple enough to be attractive and really > enhancing efficiency. > > With kind regards, > Hans-Juergen Rennau > > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ---- > Von: Liam R E Quin <http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk> > An: Hans-Juergen Rennau <http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk> > CC: http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk > Gesendet: Montag, den 1. Februar 2010, 2:14:47 Uhr > Betreff: Re: XQuery frameworks > > On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 10:03 +0000, Hans-Juergen Rennau wrote: >> Dear People, >> >> presently I am scribbling away at a little XQuery framework > > A few years ago when I did http://www.fromoldbooks.org/Search/ > using XQuery, I wrote my own. It's far from perfect -- it > is a perl script that checks the system load average (!), and > the query parameters, and then reads an xml config file, and > calls up an external xquery engine based on a variable -- so I > could easily switch between galax, qizx and saxon, initially, > and later dbxml too. It keeps a cache, to avoid firing up > a JVM (two of those implementations are in Java) with each > incoming HTTP request, and does get fairly high cache hit rates. > > It'd be a reasonable question, "why not use servlets", and > a lot of the answer to that is that, when I wrote it, Sun's > licence for Java was such that Linux distributions couldn't > easily include it, and Java was a sufficient pain to set up that > I avoided any architecture that depended on it. But then I > started using Saxon, and, later qizx, both of which do use Java. > > More recently I've used dbxml, but not on the production system, > as the packaging for dbxml is even weirder than for Java, and > my server has changed operating systems several times over the years. > > All this is a long winded way of saying, a lot of it depends on > the environment. I'm particularly interested (since I work at W3C...) > in what we could do to extend standardisation "beyond the query" into > more of a framework, and how, and what would be the value of that, but > I think the XQuery Working Group right now does not have the > resources to do that sort of work. > > Liam > > > -- > Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ > Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ > Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz > gegen Massenmails. > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk > http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk >
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format