From: "Alan Kent" <[log in to unmask]>
> * Instead of 'etc', are the following complete?
>     Relationship ::=   "=" | "<" | ">" | "<=" | ">=" | "<>"
>     Boolean::= "AND" | "OR" | "NOT"

'etc' meant that I was leaving that open for now.


> * I prefer the grammar to define precedence if possible. For example,
>   if the binding of operators is OR, AND, NOT (ie: NOT is tightest) then
>   get rid of the "Boolean" rule and use:
>
>     CqlString ::= OrTerm *( "OR" OrTerm )
>     OrTerm ::= AndTerm *( "AND" AndTerm )
>     AndTerm ::= Term *( "NOT" Term )
>     Term ::= QualifiedTerm | "(" CqlString ")"

This raises (again) the question, are we defining a wire- or
human-readable/typeable-syntax, and of course, the answer is something in
between.  But with this definition, will the productions be intuitive
enough?


> * Do we need to refer to previous result sets?
We debated this question extensively with no strong consensus but, I think
grudging acceptance.  However..

> If so, I think someone   proposed:
>     Term ::= QualifiedTerm | "(" CqlString ")" | "set" "=" SimpleString

I don't know if this will work until we nail down the syntax for the
qualified term, which might also degenerate to a simpleString so you won't
be able to distinguish a term from a result set. (In Z39.50 it's not a
problem because there is an explicit tag for result set.)



> * I will raise (not propose) that CCL allows multiple IndexQualifiers
>   in front of a single term (so you can say Author,Title="smith").

Is this just to avoid constructing an OR? or does this refer to an
Author/title index?(In which case, just define an Author/title index.)