Becoming OT Re: Transquery (Was - Re: XQuery in dbXML)

[Peter Elliott <ax...@paradise.net.nz>]

On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:13:58 -0700
Kimbro Staken <ks...@dbxmlgroup.com> wrote:

> This hasn't really been considered.
> 
> My personal opinion on it is that XSL-T is awfully cumbersome to write for 
> use as a query language. XUpdate is cumbersome enough and I actually find 
> Transquery to be even worse. I'm not a particularly big fan of XQuery 
> either, but the syntax is at least a little more friendly, even if still 
> rather cumbersome. The fact that it reinvents the wheel is a separate 
> issue.
> 
>

Yes. this cumbersomeness/here-goes-the-wheel-again is something that 'bothers' a lot of people, self included, not just with XQuery either but a lot of the w3c specs of recent times. going by traffic on xmldev and places i think there's a real and growing need for an effort to extract whatever ore exists in the path/link/pointer/query/x spec-mountain and ....
but then who has the resources, not to mention the inclination, to undertake such a Sisyphean task?

fortunately(?) we do have the Best Practice guidelines to help out when the specghetti gets a bit too much to handle.

cheers
peter
PS: congrats to you and tom on succesful initiation to apache nation.