Re: TMQL Proposal

The proposal has the beauty of being existing technology. Mature, developed, 
bug-free.
Also it is there and freely available. Even setting up a machine to play 
'Tuxracer' and watch DVDs for the children I got asked if I preferred 
Postgresql or MySQL .....

The down-side is that if relational databases could (easily) do, what TMs can 
do we wouldn't be here.

The real down-side is that we're all sat here with TMs that we have no 
standardised means of querying.
I'm not throwing stones, I must have contributed least of anyone to the WG 
process. I am though getting to the stage when I do need a QL, I can see that 
within six months I'll spend half a day and write something in Perl .... and 
if anyone uses it, it'll probably set the cause of TMs back half-a-century 
;-(>

Agreed "we [should] have a sound conceptual foundation, that
implementing TMQL isn't too hard, that it isn't difficult to learn,
and, where possible, that it fits well into existing utilities and
architectures." 

Regards,

	Michael