Is there a SQLXML 4 version in the works?

Saw a post on another message board dated Feb '02 from Michael Brundage:
"FWIW, the next version of SQLXML will interoperate much better with the rest of .Net.
The .Net classes we released in SQLXML3 were only a partial solution. And of course
as you yourself observed, the .Net frameworks themselves are just in their very first
version, and will evolve over time to better handle your scenarios."
Is there a V4 coming that integrates better with .NET, and doesnt do so much interop?
"Paul Hester" <phester@.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C9EB80D2-B29F-4963-AFA2-E1DD68D69DA0@.microsoft.com...
[snip]
> Is there a V4 coming that integrates better with .NET, and doesnt do so
much interop?
Yes. SqlXml 4.0 will also be know as SQL Server 2005.
Bryant
|||Obviously Yukon will have fantastic XML support compared to SQLXML 3Sp2. But Yukon being deployed in large numbers is still over at least a year and a half away, likely more.
|||We are planning a release with Sql Server 2005, but it will be updates to
the current technology.
Are you having any issues with interop? Or is it just that interop is in
fact there?
Irwin Dolobowsky
Program Manager - SqlXml
http://blogs.msdn.com/irwando
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Paul Hester" <phester@.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C9EB80D2-B29F-4963-AFA2-E1DD68D69DA0@.microsoft.com...
> Saw a post on another message board dated Feb '02 from Michael Brundage:
> "FWIW, the next version of SQLXML will interoperate much better with the
> rest of .Net.
> The .Net classes we released in SQLXML3 were only a partial solution. And
> of course
> as you yourself observed, the .Net frameworks themselves are just in their
> very first
> version, and will evolve over time to better handle your scenarios."
> Is there a V4 coming that integrates better with .NET, and doesnt do so
> much interop?
|||We're considering using SQLXML as the primary interface to SQL for our new .NET OLTP architecture, as it provides the very attractive means of using XSD'd as a layer over the database. Obviously we'd like our new applications to perform. However, it seems
there is considerable overhead to this. XML parsing and XSD mapping (which we understand is inherent in using XML), combined with the interop and OLEDB layers, and that the more versatile and compact updategrams aren't directly supported in DataSets (we
considered developing our own methods to iterate over a DataSet's schema and tables, etc. to generate) has left us questioning the viability of using SQLXML. It's my sense SQLXML could be much more intergrated with .NET, with more (or all) of it implement
ed natively in .NET, and directly supporting updategrams as the means to update the database from a DataSet. All if this lead to my original post.