"Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra" <lgcdutra (AT) terra (DOT) com.br> wrote in
message news

an.2003.08.27.11.11.43.753977 (AT) terra (DOT) com.br...
Quote:
Em Wed, 27 Aug 2003 02:10:37 -0700, akmal @ deja escreveu:
Query Processing and XML - A Foundation for Intelligent Networks"
What is that doing here? Is someone trying to give XML a
theoretical foundation, or is this just spam? |
One must ask: What is your post doing here, Leandro?
Theoreticians have a responsibility to follow crappy theories as well as
good theories. Failure to do so is simply closed minded.
Confronted with an inelegant theory, the theoretician has a resposibility to
ask how one can improve the elegance. The theoretician has a responsibility
to look for flaws in crappy theories and to honestly question whether the
theory is crappy after all. Perhaps, it is much better than one initially
thinks.
Further, not all data management issues relate to the logical model.
Optimisation, for instance, relates primarily to computational complexity at
the physical level. Thus research related to hierarchies, networks etc.
might have important theoretical implications that apply to all logical data
models.
Quote:
- XML-Relational DBMS
Is there such a thing? NOT! |
When someone kludges together aspects of existing logical data models, one
basically invents a new logical data model. Someone might kludge together
aspects of XML and the relational model to create a new logical data model,
and the inventor of this new logical data model might legitimately call it
"XML-Relational".
That doesn't mean "XML-Relational" is relational--quite the opposite. Nor
does it mean "XML-Relational" is necessarily a good idea as a logical data
model. It is very likely a bad idea that increases complexity with no gain.
However, that doesn't make it any less legitimate as a basis for theoretical
consideration.
Please, Leandro, show a little more discretion. You are your own worst
enemy.