<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://weblogs.asp.net/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>DLinQ = LinQ for SQL</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx</link><description>OK, it actually happened. We'll have two mapping technologies in .NET v.next. LinQ for SQL, previously known as DLinQ is the 'simple' mapping technology. LinQ for Entities, will be on top of the new ADO.NET Entity Framework, and will be the 'complex'</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2007 SP1 (Build: 20510.895)</generator><item><title>Clearing up Mapping technologies in .NET vNext</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#470196</link><pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2006 21:26:58 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:470196</guid><dc:creator>Paul Gielens:ThoughtsService</dc:creator><author>Paul Gielens:ThoughtsService</author><description>&lt;p&gt;David and Andres speculated on the positioning of the upcoming mapping technologies in .NET.The problem&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=470196" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>Clearing up Mapping technologies in .NET vNext</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#470195</link><pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2006 21:25:07 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:470195</guid><dc:creator>Paul Gielens:ThoughtsService</dc:creator><author>Paul Gielens:ThoughtsService</author><description>&lt;p&gt;David and Andres speculated on the positioning of the upcoming mapping technologies in .NET.The problem&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=470195" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: DLinQ = LinQ for SQL</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#461544</link><pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:21:48 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:461544</guid><dc:creator>James Schementi</dc:creator><author>James Schementi</author><description>&lt;p&gt;linq is actually the technology that dlinq is build on-top of.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=461544" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>ADO.NET vNext - feedback so far</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#456253</link><pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:34:25 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:456253</guid><dc:creator>ADO.NET team blog</dc:creator><author>ADO.NET team blog</author><description>&lt;p&gt;(this post&amp;amp;amp;nbsp;was originally posted here) Since announcing our ADO.NET vNext plans at TechEd ...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=456253" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>ADO.NET vNext - feedback so far</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#454588</link><pubDate>Sat, 24 Jun 2006 04:50:19 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:454588</guid><dc:creator>Data Access blog</dc:creator><author>Data Access blog</author><description>Since announcing our ADO.NET vNext plans at TechEd last week, the team has been on the lookout for your...&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=454588" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>LinQ for SQL</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#452368</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 06:51:33 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:452368</guid><dc:creator>STEFANO DEMILIANI WeBlog</dc:creator><author>STEFANO DEMILIANI WeBlog</author><description>&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=452368" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>DLINQ renamed</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#452301</link><pubDate>Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:15:26 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:452301</guid><dc:creator>Wooley's Wonderings</dc:creator><author>Wooley's Wonderings</author><description>As is typical at Microsoft conferences, they have a way of announcing code name changes. Yesterday, they...&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=452301" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: DLinQ = LinQ for SQL</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#452219</link><pubDate>Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:01:32 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:452219</guid><dc:creator>FransBouma</dc:creator><author>FransBouma</author><description>I also don't understand why they put out 2 different flavors. But I don't know the details of any of the new types, so I can't comment on that (I'm not at teched)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What it will create though is a lot of confusion for the developer: he has a database to talk to and some code to write: what to use? Linq for Sql or the entity framework? &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Is it even possible to make that decision? Based on the info I have on both frameworks, I don't think it is. So I predict one of the two will never make it to the final release, for the simple fact that whatever you can do with DLinq is also possible with the entity framework. &lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=452219" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>[LINQ] Le Mapping Objet-Relationnel dans le Framework .NET 3.0</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#452215</link><pubDate>Tue, 13 Jun 2006 06:59:25 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:452215</guid><dc:creator>Thomas Lebrun</dc:creator><author>Thomas Lebrun</author><description>Si vous travaillez avec DLINQ, voici un post qui devrait vous int&amp;amp;#233;resser:&lt;br&gt;&lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx"&gt;http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=452215" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>.NET 3.0 in plaats van WinFx. Duidelijk? (en DLinq bestaat niet meer)</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/aaguiar/archive/2006/06/12/DLinQ-_3D00_-LinQ-for-SQL.aspx#452213</link><pubDate>Tue, 13 Jun 2006 06:45:01 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:452213</guid><dc:creator>Todotnet Blog</dc:creator><author>Todotnet Blog</author><description>&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=452213" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>