Hello Tim, and thanks for your reply. It was very helpful. (And also
thanks for replying both to me and the module list, which in the past some
people didn't do.)
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Tim Bunce wrote:
> DOM shouldn't imply XML. But you could drop the D and expand the OM into
> SQL::ObjectModel,
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 07:51:45PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
>
> So, my first questions are these: 1. Would a DOM-for-SQL be useful in its
> own right to other module developers, and therefore grow beyond its
> previous intention of being "part of just one framework";
Er, perhaps :-)
> 2. What
Hello (and in particular to database module makers/users),
I am at a point in the design/development of my "Rosetta" database
abstraction tool where I am considering spitting the framework into more
independant pieces than was previously planned, namely splitting up the
"core", so that it is easie
