Object database: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:09, 23 September 2019

Revision as of 05:45, 30 November 2019

Line 95:

In February 2006, the [[Object Management Group]] (OMG) announced that they had been granted the right to develop new specifications based on the ODMG 3.0 specification and the formation of the Object Database Technology Working Group (ODBT WG). The ODBT WG planned to create a set of standards that would incorporate advances in object database technology (e.g., replication), data management (e.g., spatial indexing), and data formats (e.g., XML) and to include new features into these standards that support domains where object databases are being adopted (e.g., real-time systems). The work of the ODBT WG was suspended in March 2009 when, subsequent to the economic turmoil in late 2008, the ODB vendors involved in this effort decided to focus their resources elsewhere.

In January 2007 the [[w3c|World Wide Web Consortium]] gave final recommendation status to the [[XQuery]] language. XQuery uses [[Extensible Markup Language|XML]] as its data model. Some of the ideas developed originally for object databases found their way into XQuery, but XQuery is not intrinsically object-oriented. Because of the popularity of XML, XQuery engines compete with object databases as a vehicle for storage of data that is too complex or variable to hold conveniently in a relational database. XQuery also allows modules to be written to provide encapsulation features that have been provided by Object-Oriented systems.

[[XQuery|XQuery v1]] and [[XPath 2.0|XPath v2]] are extremely complex (no [[Free and open-source software|FOSS software]] is implementing these standards more than 10 years after their publication) when compared to [[XPath#Syntax and semantics (XPath 1.0)|XPath v1]] and [[XSLT|XSLT v1]], and [[XML]] did not fit all community demands as an [[Open standard|open format]]. Since the early 2000s [[JSON]] has gained community adoption and popularity in applications, surpassing XML in the 2010s. [[JSONiq]], a query-analog of XQuery for JSON (sharing XQuery's core expressions and operations), demonstrated the functional equivalence of the JSON and XML formats. In this context, the main strategy of OODBMS maintainers was to retrofit JSON to their databases (by using it as the internal data type).