[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XML only for data exchange ?
Hi, Gerd wrote:
>Some of you wrote that XML is only an exchange format but not a storage
>format. Why ? E.g. if I would develop an article database for a newspaper
>or library software to store the whole work of Shakespeare, why not using
>XML as data format ? I think we all agree that plain files are not suitable
>here. Should I use an RDBMS ? I doubt. What left IMHO is an XML database.
I agree with this. I hear often that XML is only a transport method, but I
think this comes from the assumption that all one's resources are
data-centric. There is a lot of document-centric information out there for
which XML is a good storage format. We are investigating Ozone as a
database for a homegrown integrated library system. One of the things that
attracted us is its ability to handle both data-centric (Java objects) and
document-centric (XMLContainers) resources. This hybrid approach is a
really nice feature (and the ability to ouput the objects as XML is an
extra plus... XML as an exchange format has its place too).
Library information consists of item records and user data that is probably
better stored in and retrieved from an object-oriented database (or an
RDBMS), but it also consists of bibliographic records which are really
document-centric. Traditionally, libraries have put bibliographic records
in a BLOB in the database (where the structure is lost) but with XML there
is the option to store these in a way that their inherent structure doesn't
go to waste. With this approach, we do not have to choose which elements
of a record are indexed and made available to the public. We also have
greater flexibility when integrating library specific information in with
other document-centric sources from the Web (XHTML).
XML, in my opinion, has a place in both the storage and transfer of
specific types of resources...
Kevin