[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ODMG 2.0 ???
ODMG compliance is only desirable if you want widespread use of Ozone.
Compliance to standards is, oftentime, a prerequisite to acceptance for
commercial applications. Adherence to standards makes porting one
application to another application easier and enables the emergence of
third-party applications that satisfy niche markets that use disparate
object databases (Objectivity, GemStone, etc.) which can add to the
"snowball effect" and generate even more use of a software program.
Like anything else, the issue of standards is a tradeoff. One of the great
things about open source software is it can lessen the need for adherence
to standards because one has the ability to satisfy that crucial niche
feature that can make or break an application. Ulitmately, however, if you
want Ozone to be accepted by industry, you are going to have to make some
effort to accommodate, at least partially, the ODMG standards. If, for no
other reason, for "newbies" to understand and quickly utilize Ozone.
Just my two cents...
Ron
Falko Braeutigam wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just received a request for ODMG 2.0 compliance of ozone. It is not
> the first one. However, we do not want to implement this because we
> would loose nearly all of the advantages of the ozone architecture -- we
> do not need things like structure definition and query languages and it
> seems to be a little bit stupid to implement them only to support some
> kind of "standard". Also, in my eyes it's not possible to establish a
> standard for OODBMSs because OODBMSs are to complex and to different.
> What do you think?
>
> Falko
> --
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Falko Braeutigam mailto:falko@softwarebuero.de
> softwarebuero m&b (SMB) http://www.softwarebuero.de