W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > January 2011

[Bug 11682] under-specification of func-available-environment-variables and unc-available-environment-variable

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:21:47 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Pesm3-0007bp-1U@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11682

--- Comment #10 from Daniela Florescu <dflorescu@mac.com> 2011-01-17 17:21:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > I think those functions should be eliminated from the standard for the
> > following reasons:
> > - they are not part of any user requirements
> 
> Clearly not the case.

Dear John,

the W3C has a very specific was to describe requirements. It is called the
Requirement document.

Here is the link to it:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-30-requirements/

I do not see anything related to this functionality there.

Why do we spend time approving requirement documents when later on we are
allowed to 
bypass them any time we feel like  !?


> 
> > - the are 100% implementation dependent (no standard semantics of any kind)
> 
> Also untrue. There are systems (like the cloud) where they make less sense than
> others, but that is not a reason to suggest that the many other XQuery
> implementations where they do make sense should lose this facility.

Excuse me, by the text we will come up with (if we accept those) will be
required to say: the semantics
of such functions is implementation dependent.

Otherwise, I will oppose it very strongly. Such functions make no sense in many
environments-- cloud is only one of them, but what about data integration,
distributed queries, etc !?

Please do not forget that data integration for example is still one of the
major use cases for XQuery.

How should a query processor return for such functions when the query is split
into smaller queries executed in a variety of other systems !?

It makes perfect NO sense.


> 
> > - they are untestable
> 
> Not a reason to remove functionality.

Yes, it is. We clutter the specification with lot of stuff -- for example we
need to extend the dynamic
context -- and it does not improve portability.

The cluttering of the specification is not to be ignored. XQuery is complicated
enough.

> 
> > - they make no technical sense on environments that use virtualized
> > infrastructure (aka cloud)
> 
> See above.
> 
> > - if implemented, they create a security breach
> 
> Can you please explain this further? It's not obvious what you're referring to
> here.

John, I am a little but surprised by that comment. 

As soon as MarkLogic implements and ships those functions, please let me know,
and 
I'll try to come up with a nice demo for you.

It seems that demos are better then a thousand words.

Best regards
Dana

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 17 January 2011 17:21:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:45 UTC