[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office-comment] Java / JDBC (ODF all versions)
Rick hi > But it is a kind of fake interopability, isn't it: a kind of > nominalism? Depends how it's done. Non-interoperability is endemic to the world of RDBMS connections (and to the DBs themselves), so "an" interoperable mechanism is not achievable, I think. Faced with that, I think what is needed is a mechanism that can accommodate the various non-interoperable options out there. > It could give the comfort of looking neutral, without actually being > neutral at all, because the incompatible semantics would be shoved off > into the values. Yes, but there could then be an opportunity for alterative sets of values for different ways of making the connection. > We want to expose non-interoperable dependencies, not > hide them away, even though it may offend our desire for abstraction. I think what we want is a way for user A who has a database-connected document to exchange that with user B and have it work, with neither user being mandated to use Java/JDBC in the process (though of course they may). I think by moving Java-specific (or ODBC-specific) settings into an informative annex, we *would* be highlighting the interop issues in play ... - Alex.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]