[xquery-talk] what XQuery COULD have done for the world...

[daniela florescu]

… if a bunch of standards people would have had some vision and some global understanding of technology:

They could have helped those NoSQL “innocents” who will try for the next 15 years to use SQL for schema-free data,
and waste billions of dollars in the process, and slow down considerably the advancement of database technology.

See today (bellow) another one of those schema-free SQL languages.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/industrys-first-schema-free-sql-engine-apache-drill-paul-tarantino

I think I see at this point one of those “SQL for NoSQL” every 2-3 days. Each equally pathetic.

Including the ones from more serious NoSQL companies, like Cassandra (DataStax):
https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/cql/CQL.html

If you look at the semantics (or lackthereof ) of their “SQL” language, and after 16 years of designing XQuery, it’s SAD…..

XQuery COULD have helped.

But it didn’t.

Oh well, thanks again those without any long term vision in the XQuery WG — but hey, they had POWER !

Dana





_______________________________________________
talk

[Ihe Onwuka]

Look I don't want to try to appear smarter than I am so I caveat my
comments by saying that I'm not an expert but I get the thrust of what your
saying.

It's a consequence of the general lack of programming language education
within the industry. Actually it's not just industry, universities graduate
computer science students without making them take a course in programming
languages - many don't even have one on the curriculum.

So people learn to program without being equipped and are sometimes
elevated to the status of programming demi-god without ever having the
ability to evaluate programming languages and while they will argue that
they can pick up other languages you can't pick up the ability to evaluate
them. You have to study that. Hence we have a situation where the most
complicated programming paradigm - OOP is the most popular and is generally
but wrongly thought to be (relatively) simple and more capable.

People take what they (think they) know and feel comfortable with and
transplant it into a different setting without being equipped to give or
giving proper consideration to it's applicability in it's new environment.
SQL/NOSQL is not the first and won't be the last instance of this happening.


 if a bunch of standards people would have had some vision and some
They could have helped those NoSQL “innocents” who will try for the next
15 years to use SQL for schema-free data,
and waste billions of dollars in the process, and slow down considerably
the advancement of database technology.
See today (bellow) another one of those schema-free SQL languages.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/industrys-first-schema-free-sql-engine-apache-drill-paul-tarantino
I think I see at this point one of those “SQL for NoSQL” every 2-3 days.
Each equally pathetic.
https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/cql/CQL.html
If you look at the semantics (or lackthereof ) of their “SQL” language,
and after 16 years of designing XQuery, it’s SAD
..
XQuery COULD have helped.
But it didn’t.
Oh well, thanks again those without any long term vision in the XQuery WG
— but hey, they had POWER !
Dana
_______________________________________________
http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk