# [tmql-wg] TMQL, next round

Robert Barta rho at bigpond.net.au
Fri Mar 9 04:12:50 EST 2007

On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 02:56:32PM +0100, Lars Heuer wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> Do you mind to open a new thread for every issue? It would help (at
> least me) to keep the overview. :)
>
> [...]
> >    TMQL Issue: Error compatibility
> [...]
> >    At the moment, the TMQL standard does not detail the errors which
> >    can occur during the static/dynamic analysis; and it also does not
> >    give the errorenous situations a name.
> [...]
> >    Structured Discussion
>
> >       ? Should the TMQL standard name all error situations
> >         + higher compatibility between TMQL implementation
> >         - less freedom for implementors
>
> I like the idea of standard errors. At least some error codes should
> be part of the standard (like SQL and XQuery do). I don't think that
> it cuts the freedom for impl. significantly.

I just looked up how it works in XQuery and they distinguish between

- static errors (analysis of query), and
- evaluation errors

And then they break it down into subclasses and have given each
individual error a QName. They have also a lengthy coverage how error
(classes) may affect optimization.

So this looks quite substantial to me.

\rho