Daniela Florescu
<https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=910384&authType=name&authToken=IP5T&trk=hp-feed-commenter-name>Dear
Mulesoft, when you have XQuery and JSONiq.org <http://jsoniq.org/>, why in the
world would you waste your time to specify something that is nearly not as
powerful !? Those are standard(s), have gazzilions of implementations, have
been tested by 15 years of usage, solve the same problem you need to solve, and
are more powerful as expressive power. So why in the world would you start the
SAME effort again from scratch ? Especially knowing how hard is to get all the
details of XML and JSON right ... (XML Schema anyone !?) show lessDelete
<https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=21047189&authType=name&authToken=aRMM&trk=hp-feed-commenter-photo>4hEmiliano
Lesende
<https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=21047189&authType=name&authToken=aRMM&trk=hp-feed-commenter-name>Hi
Daniela. Thanks for your interest on Weave. We at MuleSoft feel that there is
a sweet spot in data transformation that can be achieved by having one
transformation language that can work across multiple formats. Our
transformation solution not only works on XML and JSON, but also works with
CSV, EDI and Plain-Old-Java-Objects. XQuery and JSONiq are both geared towards
their respective formats. Regarding the powerfulness of the solution or its
completeness we feel that we achieved a very sweet spot, if you feel
differently we would love to hear what areas are we missing or what is it that
we can improve.
========================================
Daniela Florescu
<https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=910384&authType=name&authToken=IP5T&trk=hp-feed-commenter-name>Dear
Mulesoft, first of all, the XML community designed modules to import/export
almost any kind of data formats existing on the planet, and those modules are
standardized already among the (very many) XQuery implementations. So? CSV data
? Excel data ? JDBC interface ? No problem !! We can talk to ALL of them. So,
no, XQuery and JSONiq are NOT designed for their respective formats ONLY.
As for the expressive power, the only think I can say is... wait and see. Your
product is just born. We've seen 20 years of such semi-structured to
semi-structured data queries, mappings, and transforms.....Just take a look at
the standard XML Schemas: NIEM, HL7, XBRL, etc. With such real world
complexity, your simple mapping scheme will hit the limits very, very quickly.
And you'll need to extend it. And eventually you'll end up re-doiung the same
work we did while designing XQuery.
And honestly @Mulesoft, I don't wish anybody, even my worst enemy, to redo the
work that the XQuery WG and JSONiq did. This was NOT fun. That meant talking
care of horrendous complexity (XML itself, XML Schema, divergences with JSON,
etc). It took us 15 years to do that, and trust me, we were not particularly
slow, or stupid. If you are smart, you should reuse that, and not waste your
efforts and money to redo the same thing again. There is no fame or glory (nor
money!!) in there, trust me.
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
