FW: [PATCHES] XML ouput for psql

-----Original Message-----
From: Merlin Moncure
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 3:47 PM
To: 'Peter Eisentraut'
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] XML ouput for psql

My 0.2$: keep the xml formatting rules as simple as possible and rely on
xslt to do the document markup (going out) and schemas/xslt to do the
validation (going in). This would allow flexibility for any type of
application. Without that stuff just do very basic
<column>data</column>.

There are many excellent free tools for xml manipulation which imho are
the best thing about xml.

Xml datasets that are not nested tend to get verbose :(

Merlin

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e@gmx.net]
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 12:55 PM
To: greg@turnstep.com
Cc: PostgreSQL Development
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] XML ouput for psql

greg@turnstep.com writes:

I don't agree with this: XML and XHTML are two different things.

No one claimed anything to the contrary.

We could certainly upgrade the HTML portion, but I am pretty sure

that

the XML standard calls for this format:

<columnname>data here</columnname>

The XML standard does not call for any table format. But a number of
table formats have been established within the XML framework. Some of
them are formatting-oriented (e.g., the HTML model, or CALS which is

used

in DocBook) and some of them are processing-oriented (e.g., SQL/XML).
Which do we need? And which do we need from psql in particular

(keeping

in mind that psql is primarily for interactive use and

shell-scripting)?

In any case, it should most likely be a standard table model and not a
hand-crafted one.

(If, for whatever reason, we go the "processing-oriented" route, then

I

claim that there should not be a different output with and without \x
mode.)

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net

---------------------------(end of

broadcast)---------------------------