Re: TMQL, next round

On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 02:56:32PM +0100, Lars Heuer wrote:
> Hi Robert,
> 
> Do you mind to open a new thread for every issue? It would help (at
> least me) to keep the overview. :)
> 
> [...]
> >    TMQL Issue: Error compatibility
> [...]
> >    At the moment, the TMQL standard does not detail the errors which
> >    can occur during the static/dynamic analysis; and it also does not
> >    give the errorenous situations a name.
> [...]
> >    Structured Discussion
> 
> >       ? Should the TMQL standard name all error situations
> >         + higher compatibility between TMQL implementation
> >         - less freedom for implementors
> 
> I like the idea of standard errors. At least some error codes should
> be part of the standard (like SQL and XQuery do). I don't think that
> it cuts the freedom for impl. significantly.

I just looked up how it works in XQuery and they distinguish between

  - static errors (analysis of query), and
  - evaluation errors

And then they break it down into subclasses and have given each
individual error a QName. They have also a lengthy coverage how error
(classes) may affect optimization.

So this looks quite substantial to me.

\rho