W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: DASL language comparison

From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 10:02:31 -0800
Message-Id: <37EF9E9A-6941-436F-A63D-13BA991E3CC2@cs.ucsc.edu>
Cc: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On Dec 18, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Jim Whitehead schrieb:
>> One of the original goals of DASL is to be able to create queries  
>> that easily translate to SQL. If you have a DASL interpreter of  
>> this type (as is the case with Catacomb), then the collation order  
>> is, to a large extent, outside the control of the DASL  
>> implementation. The collation order is controlled by the  
>> underlying SQL engine.
> Right. And even worse, you may even not be able to find out what  
> the collation is.

I agree this is undesirable. OTOH, short of exposing a string  
identifying the underlying database and version (a security risk),  
I'm not sure how we could reliably expose this.

>> I imagine that if the DASL specification indicated a collation  
>> order that was inconsistent with the underlying query engine use  
>> by an implementation, the implementation would just ignore the  
>> specification.
> Right. I'm currently tempted to close this issue as WONTFIX for the  
> initial revision, and add an appendix discussing the issues and  
> potential approaches.

I'd love to hear a better solution, but I think what you are stating  
is realistic.

- Jim
Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 18:02:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:22:44 UTC