W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Limited complexity requirement?

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 01:09:03 +0200
To: "Steve Harris <S.W.Harris" <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF31D2492.0A50C23A-ONC1256ED9.007E4C38-C1256ED9.007F2CBB@agfa.com>

SteveH wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 07:54:29 -0700, Dan Connolly wrote:
>>
>> While thinking about xquery-based designs, I realized I have been
>> assuming the following requirement. What do other folks think?
>>
>> 3.X Limited complexity
>>
>> Less expressive languages are easier to implement, deploy, secure, and
>> optimize (cf the Principle of Least Poser in an essay on design
>> principles for the Web[1]). Since a large and interesting class of
>> applications can be addressed with query languages that are less
>> expressive than programming languages, this design should not involve a
>> turning-complete query evaluator. The halting problem must not be
>> expressible in this query language design.

I guess it's "Least Power" and "not Turing-complete"...

> Seems good to me.

To me too, very much indeed!
It even seems to me that the q:select and q:where
are enough for all the cases I had hands on and
it's even a way to write rules that way
<ruleURI> q:select {conclusion}; q:where {premis}.
and I'm more than ever convinced not to have the
power of a programming language, just least power
(and just as written in TimBL's "Weaving the Web")

-- 
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 22 July 2004 19:10:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:20 GMT