|
|
|
Size
|
and an explain idea
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:08:08 -0400 |
25 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Adam Dickmeiss |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:04:32 +0200 |
96 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Hammond, Tony |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:49:50 +0100 |
117 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
LeVan,Ralph |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:38:05 -0400 |
71 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Ray Denenberg |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:29:45 -0400 |
77 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:17:38 -0400 |
74 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Adam Dickmeiss |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:15:41 +0200 |
52 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Mike Taylor |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:12:38 +0100 |
38 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:41:36 -0400 |
27 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:30:25 -0400 |
148 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
LeVan,Ralph |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:23:12 -0400 |
106 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:05:37 -0400 |
74 lines |
Re: content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
LeVan,Ralph |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:52:32 -0400 |
40 lines |
content-type for Zeerex/Explain
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:47:54 -0400 |
22 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Adam Dickmeiss |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:29:13 +0200 |
212 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Hammond, Tony |
Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:58:36 +0100 |
175 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Hammond, Tony |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 14:28:52 +0100 |
48 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:22:50 -0400 |
173 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Adam Dickmeiss |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 15:21:50 +0200 |
156 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Hammond, Tony |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 14:04:32 +0100 |
136 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Adam Dickmeiss |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 14:41:25 +0200 |
97 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Edward C. Zimmermann |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 12:18:33 +0200 |
60 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Matthew Dovey |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 11:14:11 +0100 |
37 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 10:31:58 +0100 |
106 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Matthew Dovey |
Fri, 4 Jun 2010 09:40:47 +0100 |
95 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:21:03 -0400 |
34 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:18:44 -0400 |
128 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:41:25 +0100 |
153 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:38:24 +0100 |
115 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:34:34 -0400 |
130 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:08:47 -0400 |
89 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:37:31 +0100 |
43 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
John Harrison |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:03:32 +0100 |
32 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Ray Denenberg |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:49:04 -0400 |
82 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:13:53 -0400 |
124 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Ray Denenberg |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 10:51:20 -0400 |
86 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 15:39:17 +0100 |
66 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 10:43:05 -0400 |
47 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 10:40:59 -0400 |
67 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Ray Denenberg |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 10:28:40 -0400 |
28 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 14:50:47 +0100 |
46 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 09:44:37 -0400 |
36 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Tue, 1 Jun 2010 22:05:38 -0400 |
29 lines |
Re: CQL 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Wed, 2 Jun 2010 01:27:06 +0100 |
19 lines |
CQL 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Tue, 1 Jun 2010 18:16:59 -0400 |
17 lines |
CQL plugin for Blacklight
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 28 Jun 2010 21:12:26 -0400 |
84 lines |
Re: CQL-Java release 1.6 fixes lexing bug (Was: new version of cql-ruby)
|
LeVan,Ralph |
Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:39:33 -0400 |
47 lines |
CQL-Java release 1.6 fixes lexing bug (Was: new version of cql-ruby)
|
Mike Taylor |
Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:07:41 +0100 |
29 lines |
Re: more Explain questions!
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:02:52 -0400 |
41 lines |
more Explain questions!
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:59:39 -0400 |
28 lines |
Re: new version of cql-ruby
|
Mike Taylor |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:50:20 +0100 |
38 lines |
Re: new version of cql-ruby
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:47:57 -0400 |
28 lines |
Re: new version of cql-ruby
|
Mike Taylor |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:30:34 +0100 |
166 lines |
Re: new version of cql-ruby
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:05:29 -0400 |
105 lines |
Re: new version of cql-ruby
|
Hammond, Tony |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:55:35 +0100 |
73 lines |
new version of cql-ruby
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:36:23 -0400 |
33 lines |
Re: SRU 2.0 httpAccept and its sub-parameters
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:13:26 -0400 |
33 lines |
SRU 2.0 httpAccept and its sub-parameters
|
Denenberg, Ray |
Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:05:27 -0400 |
35 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:15:57 +0100 |
29 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:23:44 -0400 |
25 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Hammond, Tony |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 13:03:01 +0100 |
96 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Matthew Dovey |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:45:55 +0100 |
42 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 11:40:22 +0100 |
30 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Matthew Dovey |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:59:19 +0100 |
51 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:29:47 +0100 |
156 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Adam Dickmeiss |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 11:07:35 +0200 |
100 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Matthew Dovey |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 22:26:09 +0100 |
44 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Peter Noerr |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 20:40:51 +0000 |
32 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
LeVan,Ralph |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 16:16:40 -0400 |
22 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Matthew Dovey |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 21:12:16 +0100 |
23 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
LeVan,Ralph |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 15:59:27 -0400 |
56 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Peter Noerr |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:33:03 +0000 |
48 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Edward C. Zimmermann |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 20:21:52 +0200 |
40 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
LeVan,Ralph |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 12:51:25 -0400 |
108 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 17:18:21 +0100 |
118 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 12:09:08 -0400 |
97 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Mike Taylor |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 16:57:06 +0100 |
80 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 11:47:31 -0400 |
66 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress |
Mon, 7 Jun 2010 11:42:11 -0400 |
38 lines |
Re: ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Ray Denenberg |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 18:59:04 -0400 |
35 lines |
ZeeRex/Explain 2.0?
|
Jonathan Rochkind |
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 18:49:45 -0400 |
24 lines |