On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Christian Grün <christian.gruen@gmail.com> wrote:
> So far, we have not allowed any 'import org.basex.*' in our code. I'm not an
> expert in XML or Java, but it was my understanding that XQJ is the standard
> way of operating on XML databases from Java code.
Yes, it's supposed to get the new official Java standard. However,
there has been quite some discontent about its usability in the XQuery
community; see e.g. here:
http://x-query.com/pipermail/talk/2009-June/
This is why many XML databases and processors don't offer XQJ at all
(and XML:DB is out-of-dated)…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xml_database
Next, we observe that many users start off with the official APIs and
end up using our own API to get the full range of features, and,
eventually, make things easier.
After all, I don't want to discourage anyone from using XQJ; some
users are completely satisfied with it, and, as an external user, I'd
prefer a generic XQuery API as well.
Comments from everyone are welcome.
Writing code that is BaseX specific (with BaseX a University-supported open source project that has no industrial backing whatsoever) is out of the question. I'm saying this as someone who leads a University-supported open source project myself.
We want to be able to dump our XML content and take it elsewhere should BaseX disappear.
Leaving XQJ aside, are there any other standards, official or not, on the horizon? Alternatively, how people implemented any db-independent layers that could be made to target different XML databases easily?
- Godmar