- From: Paul Cotton <pcotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 07:57:17 -0800
- To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: <public-qt-comments@w3.org>, "Jonathan Robie" <jonathan.robie@datadirect.com>
> > 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. Trying to get more info on your position ... I think the reason that people have suggested using XPath only in URIs is that it is effectively a read-only path expression language whereas XQuery can do construction and create new XML constructs. When you say "any query language" are you suggesting that all features of XQuery including functions, modules, constructions of new XML, the forth coming update language, etc. must all be supported in URIs? /paulc Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Nepean, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329 mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com > -----Original Message----- > From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-qt-comments- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mark Baker > Sent: January 12, 2004 10:51 AM > To: Jonathan Robie > Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org > Subject: Re: XQuery and GET > > > 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 10:59:51 UTC