Re: tolog for TMQL

Dear Lars,

The intention of the current editors is not at all to ignore Barta's 
model. The opposite. There were some comments about Barta's draft (like 
that the path language is difficult to understand, that the reverse axis 
is confusing to some, that some don't like both FLWR and SELECT, ...), 
and we try to address these comments.

This is a learning process, so it may be seen that we go off target at 
times. The idea of sending the very drafty thoughts of us to everybody 
is a way to make this process faster by listening to your educated 
comments (like the last email of Robert Barta). It is a pity, yet 
natural, that some others see this as a weakness of the approach.

Taking Tolog as a standard was on the table for very long time now (more 
than 6 years!), and it did not happen.

I personally oppose to that from various reasons - but the main one is 
that it will be as difficult to "Take tolog 1.2 as basis", and introduce 
all kind of changes... and I cannot see how that modified Tolog will be 
able to compete with a language based on what Robert Barta has to offer 
in his draft.

This process takes time, and we all dislike this fact. But it does take 
time.

On the other hand, we do have a deadline for the next draft - June-2011 
(a bit more than 2 months from now). And we do plan to implement the 
language while we standardize it - in order to check that we do not 
standardize something that cannot be implemented. So I think the process 
will go a bit faster than you may expect.

Kind regards,

Rani





----- Original Message -----
From: "Lars Heuer" <[email protected]>
To: "TopicMapMail" <topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, 27 March, 2011 11:41:42 AM
Subject: Re: [topicmapmail] tolog for TMQL

[...]
> again that Groundhog Dog feeling.

:) ... Day :)

Since the current path seems to ignore the (IMO) good model of Barta's
query language and starts from zero (again), what do we have to loose
if we take standardize a modified tolog as level-0 and introduce the
path language later? The current proposal seems have not a good model
as Barta's model. It provides no advanced model compared to tolog but
introduces just a new syntax and introduces something new and lacks of
a proof that it works.

Best regards,
Lars
-- Semagia
<http://www.semagia.com/>
_______________________________________________ topicmapmail mailing
list topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail

-- 
-- 
Rani Pinchuk
Software Engineer
Space Applications Services
Leuvensesteenweg, 325
B-1932 Zaventem
Belgium

Tel.: + 32 2 721 54 84
Fax.: + 32 2 721 54 44

http://www.spaceapplications.com