# [tmql-wg] TMQL Proposal

Robert Barta rho@bond.edu.au
Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:48:21 +1000

On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 06:52:08PM +0000, Kal Ahmed wrote:
> 1) Don't hire students to do a developer's work.
> 2) And how many students know tolog / AsTMa ?

Hehe. I would love to have been present when SQL was suggested the
first time, in a time where most commercial DB products used the

> >Why is Google not using a relational database? Or _any_ other search
> >engine? Why is the publishing company next door not using Oracle, but
> >a (still off-the-shelf) image pattern matching database?

> And how much did they pay to develop them ?

How big is the search engine business (selling search + content +
content intelligence) relative to the RDB business?

And: Why should we pretend that today (2005) we start with NO
experiences in creating languages and data repositories?

> How portable is the knowledge of those systems ?

At these levels of money involved this is handled as a 'secondary'
issue.

> How can they apply their pattern matching technique to other
> enterprise-level applications ?

I, honestly, do not know, but I know that this now means a major
revenue for them.

> And your point is that implementing a new type of database system tuned
> to topic maps is in someway a less difficult task ?

We are talking about two things:

(a) the user (=application engineer's) view of handling and querying a map
(b) how this is actually implemented

For (a) I strongly believe that a language about S should not use the
concepts from S'. So if we have topics and assertions in maps, then
the query/modification language should revolve to that.

For (b) I am completely open (and may, in fact, 'borrow' ideas from
those who have implemented SQL stores). But I also want people in
industries who have special non-functional requirements (read
speed/size, ...) to have a way to implement TMQL ontop of their
special purpose engines.

> Sorry I don't see how this statement jibes with the one about
> specialising the data store for the task.

Sorry, I lost context.

> Well, what is your argument ? That we should all be developing new data
> stores and a new query paradigm as well as trying to sell the topic
> maps meta-model ?

Yes. And no. As I said with (a) and (b) before.

> See you in 10 years when you have something you can sell to a CIO.

Hmm, I would assume that a good working prototype (starting at field
0) would take a reasonable software house 3-5 man months. Most of the
work actually goes into secondary stuff (data types, special functions,
pragmas, ...).

> >Don't you have here then not a double impedance mismatch?
> >
> >    Application -> Kal.SQL.Views -> XQuery?
> >
>
> Maybe so (I'm not convinced) - but its certainly going to get me from A
> to B going via C than trying to reinvent the wheel and the road.

See you in 10 years when you have convinced your CIO that this is a
good idea :-))

\rho
{"extraction_info": {"found_math": true, "script_math_tex": 0, "script_math_asciimath": 0, "math_annotations": 0, "math_alttext": 0, "mathml": 0, "mathjax_tag": 0, "mathjax_inline_tex": 0, "mathjax_display_tex": 0, "mathjax_asciimath": 1, "img_math": 0, "codecogs_latex": 0, "wp_latex": 0, "mimetex.cgi": 0, "/images/math/codecogs": 0, "mathtex.cgi": 0, "katex": 0, "math-container": 0, "wp-katex-eq": 0, "align": 0, "equation": 0, "x-ck12": 0, "texerror": 0, "math_score": 0.20293208956718445, "perplexity": 5172.055077977424}, "config": {"markdown_headings": true, "markdown_code": true, "boilerplate_config": {"ratio_threshold": 0.18, "absolute_threshold": 10, "end_threshold": 15, "enable": true}, "remove_buttons": true, "remove_image_figures": true, "remove_link_clusters": true, "table_config": {"min_rows": 2, "min_cols": 3, "format": "plain"}, "remove_chinese": true, "remove_edit_buttons": true, "extract_latex": true}, "warc_path": "s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-47/segments/1542039743007.0/warc/CC-MAIN-20181116091028-20181116113028-00507.warc.gz"}