- From: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 01:34:47 -0700
- To: "Philip Wadler" <wadler@inf.ed.ac.uk>, "Liam Quin" <liam@w3.org>
- Cc: "Tolkin, Steve" <Steve.Tolkin@FMR.COM>, <www-ql@w3.org>
Ditto. I find the last two announcements (programming language and PERL-like) to be more contra-productive to the adoption and acceptance of XQuery. Could we please avoid such wording in the future and review the annoucement in the working group? Thanks Michael ________________________________ From: www-ql-request@w3.org on behalf of Philip Wadler Sent: Mon 4/11/2005 1:24 AM To: Liam Quin Cc: Tolkin, Steve; www-ql@w3.org Subject: Re: new drafts published Liam, I agree with Steve. There are similarities with Perl and there are also differences. Calling the syntax Perl-like may attract some folk, but will alienate others. Since it is not a description that enjoys the concensus of the group it is best avoided. -- P Liam Quin wrote: > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 02:29:06PM -0400, Tolkin, Steve wrote: > Oops, I didn't copy my reply to the list, sorry.... > >>I quote from the announcement below: >> >>* XQuery 1.0: An XML Query Language: >> A non-XML, Perl-like syntax for querying ... >> >>"Perl-like syntax"? > > > Uses $ signs to signify variables; uses {...} for scope; has > optional type checking system (although much weaker than XQuery's); > has lists (sequences) that can contain trees but not sequences; > there are actually quite a lot of similarities between XQuery and > Perl at the superficial level, although as a user of both languages > I know well that there are many differences. > > XQuery's syntax is not a human-readable XML-based one such as that > of XSLT, though. > > Liam >
Received on Monday, 11 April 2005 08:36:38 UTC