- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:50:30 -0500
- To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@datadirect.com>
- Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org
I apologize, but I only just realized that I hadn't responded to this. On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 02:24:03PM -0400, Jonathan Robie wrote: > At 12:36 PM 10/17/2003, Mark Baker wrote: > > > There are limits to what fits easily on a URI. A 12 page query with > > > functions and schema imports probably doesn't naturally fit into this > > > framework. > > > >Probably not, no. But for smaller, perhaps simpler queries, I think it > >would be enormously useful. Where the WG decides to draw this line, I > >don't know (FLWR??). But I also wonder if drawing a line may be more > >work than covering the general case, and then letting your customers > >(XQuery processor designers and app-developers) decide what's too big to > >go in a URI. 8-) That's totally your call, of course, but anything you > >can do in this direction would be progress, I'd say, and would address > >my concern. > > Perhaps XPath is the right level for this? Perhaps, but I feel strongly that any query language on the Web (and especially those developed in the W3C) should be able to use URIs. I'm also not convinced that a general XQuery URI serialization isn't possible. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Monday, 12 January 2004 10:49:09 UTC