Log in

No account? Create an account

"XQuery will be worse, not better, than SQL."

« previous entry | next entry »
Aug. 5th, 2004 | 04:11 am
mood: awakeawake
music: Jose Alfredo Jimenez con Mariachi Vargas - Mexican Hat Dance

Finally someone explains how XML is crap using ideas I can understand. Interestingly, they shoot down SQL as well because it fails to implement the One True Relational Model.

This all sort of explains why my XML exposure has been like this: load up the XML file in a text editor or an IDE that runs slow as molasses (because it's working on a huge huge file of redundant text -- it's like running uncompiled code!), figure out an XSL transform to make it look like a set of MSAccess tables, and import them to Access. Now all the implicit things become explicit, and speedy, too. Ahh. Now we can ask the data what it means.

Link | Leave a comment |

Comments {9}

Triple Entendre

Re: Sounds similar to some of my first impressions

from: triple_entendre
date: Aug. 6th, 2004 05:59 am (UTC)

"They look like nails to me! BAM!"


"Hammers will solve all our problems because they're so cool! Is your solution hammer-compatible? Our product is better, because it supports hammers. What, tighten this screw? Hmm, screw-management systems are too complicated and don't represent our problem domain well! Our problem has a hammer, see? BAM! Ooh, that method seems to crash the screws. We are misapplying our hammer!"

"We need to work on a better hammer-based solution. How about if we attach this heavy oscillating motor to the hammer's base, and apply pressure slowly to the screw? See, it vibrates right into place! Hammers are an excellent framework for these sorts of problems."

"It's a bit slow on screws, but we're working on that. Here's a proposed query mechanism that should help: we'll attach this laser measuring device alongside the hammer head to vary the vibration speed depending on screw properties!"

Reply | Parent | Thread