<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>ODBMS Industry Watch &#187; LINQ</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.odbms.org/blog/tag/linq/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.odbms.org/blog</link>
	<description>Trends and Information on Objects and Databases, Object Persistence, Innovation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:32:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>LINQ: the best option for a future Java query API?</title>
		<link>http://www.odbms.org/blog/2008/10/is-really-linq-best-option-for-future/</link>
		<comments>http://www.odbms.org/blog/2008/10/is-really-linq-best-option-for-future/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 04:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Roberto V. Zicari</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LINQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ODBMS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ODBTWG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OMG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.odbms.org/odbmsblog/2008/10/07/linq-the-best-option-for-a-future-java-query-api/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My interview to Mike Card has triggered an intense discussion (still ongoing), on the pros and cons of considering LINQ as the best option for a future Java query API. 
There is a consensus that a common query mechanism for odbms is needed. 
However, there is quite a disagreement on how this should be done. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.odbms.org/blog/2008/10/is-really-linq-best-option-for-future/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LINQ is the best option for a future Java query API</title>
		<link>http://www.odbms.org/blog/2008/08/linq-is-best-option-for-future-java/</link>
		<comments>http://www.odbms.org/blog/2008/08/linq-is-best-option-for-future-java/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Roberto V. Zicari</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LINQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ODBMS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ODBTWG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OMG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.odbms.org/odbmsblog/2008/08/27/linq-is-the-best-option-for-a-future-java-query-api/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A conversation with Mike Card.
I have interviewed Mike Card on the latest development of the OMG working group which aims at defining a new standards for Object Database Systems.
Mike works with Syracuse Research Corporation (SRC) and is involved in object databases and their application to challenging problems, including pattern recognition. He chairs the ODBT group [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.odbms.org/blog/2008/08/linq-is-best-option-for-future-java/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
