Jeff Julian's Blog

Just Another Geek With A Blog


News

+Jeff Julian GWB Tag







SharePoint Consulting (Kansas City Metro)

SharePoint Training

AJI Software - Careers





Check out some of my wife's products!:

Cake Mixes - Made With Scratch
Cookie Mixes - Made With Scratch
Marinades - Made With Scratch

My Stats

  • Posts - 707
  • Comments - 636
  • Trackbacks - 925

Twitter












Tag Cloud


Recent Comments


Recent Posts


Archives


Post Categories


Image Galleries


My Company


My Fav. Sites



In this episode of MSDN TV Mark Fussell, former Lead Program Manager of the WebData XML Team, talks about XML features of Visual Studio 2005. Inside of which he talks about the XPathDocument being editable and XQuery support and we know that is not going to happen. The show is basically based on his article that needs to be updated, but that is doubtful since everyone on the WebData XML Team either left or has went back into an unknown hole to not be found. That is another problem for another day (not people leaving, but who is left and where are they?). If I was on the XML team, I would suggest this MSDN TV be edited or attach a disclaimer about the no longer valid statements that are made in this video.

Comments

Gravatar # re: Wow, bad timing on MSDN TV
Posted by Soumitra Sengupta on 12/12/2004 12:38 PM
Jeff:
Thanks for pointing to the dated article. We will get this updated. I am interested in your take on XQuery. Did we make the right or wrong call on this?
Soumitra
Gravatar # re: Wow, bad timing on MSDN TV
Posted by Jeff Julian on 12/12/2004 6:54 PM
Taking away the functionality needed to stay on top of the latest XML trends? Putting it in SQL Server, but not in .NET. Yeah, I would say you made the wrong decision.
Gravatar # re: Wow, bad timing on MSDN TV
Posted by Soumitra Sengupta on 12/13/2004 10:25 AM
XQuery is not a W3C recommendation yet and will not be for at least a year (maybe more). In .NET you have support for XPath, XSLT and the API's. In SQL Server, the only way to query XML Datatype is the XQuery subset that we feel comfortable shipping. Plus it is not clear that there are compelling client side scenarios that are blocked without XQuery. I cannot say the same thing in the server though.

Gravatar # re: Wow, bad timing on MSDN TV
Posted by Jeff Julian on 12/13/2004 10:26 AM
Ok, if we can't use XQuery without a final spec, then allow 3rd parties to use the logic of an XmlCommand to extend the support. From what I have heard, XmlCommand is gone in beta 2, what is the avenue for 3rd XQuery (or XSLT 2) entensions in beta 2? XQuery to me isn't even the biggest issue, the removal of the XPathDocument functions is. To have an Editible API like XPathNavigator, but only one store to edit with, seems like bad reason to use XPathNavigator and developers will still use .AppendChild. Plus with the perf shown at PDC verse XmlDocument, why take it out?
Gravatar # A letter from a dead house
Posted by Signs on the Sand on 12/14/2004 2:36 PM
I was doing some catch up reading feeds I'm subscribed and I found this one item that made me feeling some sort of bitter nostalgia. It's right on MSDN TV site, a new episode where Mark Fussel explains new XML features in upcoming .NET 2.0. The episode is dated December...
Gravatar # XSLT 2.0, XQuery, and their non-support on the .NET platform
Posted by <XSLT:Blog /> on 12/15/2004 6:54 PM
Wow, bad timing on MSDN TV This is a conversation that Jeff Julian began and has since been followed up by Soumitra Sengupta on the Microsoft XML team and later by Oleg Tkachenko. The title of the piece doesn't give...
Gravatar # re: Wow, bad timing on MSDN TV
Posted by Soumitra Sengupta on 12/19/2004 8:46 PM
Jeff: When you said XmlCommand, where you talking about XQueryCommand? To be honest, we have not thought about it. But if a 3rd party wants to write a XQuery implementation for the .NET Framework, we would have no objections. I will take your suggestion, talk to Arpan (he owns the API) and figure out what is the right way to do this.
Post A Comment
Title:
Name:
Email:
Comment:
Verification: