- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 09:37:10 -0500
- To: Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org, chamberl@almaden.ibm.com
Elliotte: > The first paragraph in section 1 states that SQL is Turing complete. > I could be wrong about this, and it could depend on the dialect, but > I don't think SQL is Turing complete, at least not in its usual > standard incarnation. Thanks for catching this. I share your suspicion that SQL is not in fact Turing Complete. The assertion that it is appears in Tim's original at [1], and was carried over to the draft finding[2]. I'll put it on the To Do list to check up and correct as necessary. I'm also copying Don Chamberlin, who presumably can set us straight quickly. Thank you. Noah [1] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Principles.html#PLP [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/leastPower-2005-12-19.html -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 -------------------------------------- Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu> 12/20/2005 03:40 AM To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com cc: www-tag@w3.org Subject: Re: Initial Draft Finding on Principle of Least Power The first paragraph in section 1 states that SQL is Turing complete. I could be wrong about this, and it could depend on the dialect, but I don't think SQL is Turing complete, at least not in its usual standard incarnation. A quick Google search on "SQL Turing complete" turned up these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing-complete http://www.biglist.com/lists/xsl-list/archives/200207/msg00704.html -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 14:37:37 UTC