Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-general-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 58159 invoked by uid 500); 23 Oct 2001 16:07:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: general@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 58108 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 16:07:24 -0000 Reply-To: From: "Paulo Gaspar" To: Subject: RE: [vote] A native XML database project under Apache Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:21:43 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3BD00170.A6D8ED7C@apache.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Object databases are having much more success being adapted to store XML than relational ones. (And I do not like Object databases. =:o( ) Have fun, Paulo Gaspar http://www.krankikom.de http://www.ruhronline.de > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:stefano@apache.org] > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:33 PM > > ........ > > "Kevin A. Burton" wrote: > > > > Also. What about other approaches. AKA the Exist project uses > relational > > database systems to provide a persistence layer for XML. I > think this is a > > solid and logical approach. > > I don't, but this is just my personal opinion. It appears elegant from a > strictly mathematical point of view but becomes impractical when put in > production (I know this for experience) > > .... --------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org