Re: [dba-users] FYI: [specs-announce] new spec: Queries in Queries

[Andrew Jensen]

Bob Wickham wrote: I don't believe we should have things the same as Access just because its the way that Access does it. If we humans didn't strive for a better way to do things we would still be rubbing sticks together to make fire. If theres an easier way or a better way or even a different way then go for it. I agree, a query on a query is a very useful tool and Base should have something similar but who cares what its called, as long as it works. Not doing it the way MS Access does it, just because MS Access does it that way is equally as undesireable, I feel. I suppose the first question is - just what is meant by the term Query and View. In my mind a query is a statement that is created by an end user, contained within the Base document. In the case of the Base database being a front end to a multi user database queries are not visible to other users of the database. A view on the other had is a predefined statement stored in the database servers file space, it is available to be created only to users authorized at the database server. The view will be available for use, possibly, by all registered users of a multi-user database. I think it is easy to loose sight of this distinction when thinking of the single user implementation of the HSQL engine. Bob Wickham Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany wrote: Hi Regina, (feedback to a spec! I love communities :) First: Nothing of this is nailed down. There are other ways to implement this (at least in a "solution compatible way"), so I highly appreciate every feedback.   I have read the document. I understand it in this way: You will make queries automatically convert to views to use the already existing feature, that queries on views are possible and you tell the user that this view would be a "query" but in reality it is a view. Why that effort? Why mix up the terms?     Well ... you won't like this argueing ;) ... because people keep screaming for queries in queries. Of course we could simply make views editable (which in fact is what is internally going in), but even then, I'm pretty sure a lot of MSA users will keep saying "I want queries in queries, MSA has it". Even if you tell them they can do the very same thing by creating a view, and editing it if necessary, they will continue. That's basically the main idea behind the proposed architecture. However, as said, this is not nailed down, so keep your arguments coming :) Thanks & Ciao Frank   --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]