- From: Vegt, Jan <Jan.Vegt@softwareag.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:07:37 +0200
- To: "'www-zig@w3.org'" <www-zig@w3.org>
On Friday, July 13 Robert Anderson wrote: >I understand that the impetus here is to bring it into line with >current web database structures. As far as I'm concerned, this >is a waste of time as the current advantages of Z are being cut >out. People will just use SQL, rather than ZNG as it is proven >and established, with a very large knowledge and support base >lready in existance. I don't agree. Based on the current ZNG document the initiative looks very useful to me. I think the problem statement is valid. I think there is a nice balance in the omitted and retained features. It has a good feel of being in touch with current technological developments. Personally I don't see SQL having an impact in this particular technological area. Jan PS Marketing-wise the 'Common' as in CQL could use a more descriptive label which would (also) allow differentiation and positioning versus stuff like XQuery. Analogous to the 'Search/Retrieve web service' marketing label which I think is brilliant.
Received on Friday, 13 July 2001 08:07:42 UTC