Re:Isn't XML semi-object oriented? (Score 1)

What is more arrogant? To make statements based on long and deep familiarity with a given subject, or to dismiss those statements because one doesn't understand them? The latter implies that, you are SO smart, that if you can't immediately grasp the basis of their complaint, it is groundless.

Let's see, you have flat tables with a defined primary key and you form relations between these flat tables.

No, you don't! This is not a statement that would be made by a person who understands the relational model. Tables aren't flat. Relations aren't between tables. You probably do have some familiarity with products that call themselves "relational" but they aren't true to the model, and that is probably the source of your misunderstanding, and that is Date's gripe.

A snit crassly dismisses several millenia of literature because it is unstructured.

No he didn't. Literature has structure. Chapters, paragraphs, sentences, words. Themes, story arcs, scenes, settings. Etc, etc. Can you honestly claim that XML is "unstructured" information? Does it not have organizing priciples? Date is saying that to claim that XML is useful for "unstructured" information is nonsense, because there is no such thing.