- 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