Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of jukka.zitting@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.132.243 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=g8+k4yDT9lel23BWRg2IP47FVq8S3MgH8784EOWEPuQL6Io9cCfsvVuu9gvcU1Id0/Z31NTRjTN7rEZUGmn17JaVcOIy8/AVeY25H/T/d1PX68NRhFkhYpeV9dskgDWabdCDTfYRKSru6dHxFwbXuFlhoMzsKm1F9RZ+0X+ZVNE=
Message-ID: <510143ac0707161316x5a59583ak4dffeeb95ff38296@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 23:16:26 +0300
From: "Jukka Zitting" <jukka.zitting@gmail.com>
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: 7.4 Appendix D: JCR 1.0 XPath (Deprecated)
In-Reply-To: <469BC7DC.1050401@yourmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <469BC7DC.1050401@yourmail.com>

Hi,

On 7/16/07, IvanLatysh <ivan@yourmail.com> wrote:
> That's strange, that committee want to drop XPath and replace it with
> home-grown query language when obvious next logical step for JCR would be to
> introduce XQuery language, but instead, XPath has been dropped in favor of
> "Abstract Query Model" ?!?!
>
> Would be nice to hear the reason why committee decide to introduce a query
> language that from the moment of birth has no future, instead of take an
> existing well defined query language (XQuery).

I'm not free to discuss the specifics of the discussions leading to
this decision, but the query features have certainly been one of the
more debated areas of the specification. There are a number of
conflicting requirements from various vendors and users, and it was
felt that specifying an abstract query model instead of a specific
query syntax would better allow us to express the specific query
functionality that a content repository needs to implement.

Note that Jackrabbit will most certainly continue to support XPath and
our plan is actually to implement an XPath/XQuery to JCR query model
converter, that should be usable by any JCR 2.0 repository or client
to support queries expressed in (a subset of) XPath or XQuery.

> P.S. As a system architect I can say that if it stay this way, we will abandon
> JCR and re-factor out project for XML database.

Please let us know at jsr-283-comments@jcp.org. Direct user feedback
is very valuable, especially since most of the expert group members
represent the repository implementer and vendor point of view.

BR,

Jukka Zitting