On 7/18/07, Thomas Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/17/07, IvanLatysh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >... To summarize all this I propose to use 'X' languages to work > with 'X' data structures.... So in your view, JCR is an XML database? For me, JCR is: - File System - RDBMS - LDAP - Subversion...
I think this is the core problem when it comes to JCR queries: if one sees JCR as an XML storage on steroids, XQuery or XPath make a lot of sense, as they're familiar and work well with tree structures. For people who see JCR more as a filesystem on turbo steroids, having to grasp tree-based query languages might be intimidating. So I think the JSR 283 approach, which is IIUC: 1. Specify a realistically implementable query model 2. Specify a default language, SQLish so that most people understand it well makes a lot of sense. It doesn't prevent implementations from defining additional query languages, and maybe those could come later as extensions or additional specs? So although I will miss XPath, I agree that it's a good thing for the spec to concentrate on the underlying query model. -Bertrand
