Assuming people like the idea of a bath prefix for
cql, let's move forward. I have a few questions:

1. Should well-known srw prefixes themselves be
prefixed with "X-" as Mike suggests?   Please
comment.  I don't really think that rfc 822 sets
this precedent as it has alot of well-known fields
without "x-", and it seems that the "x-" is for
extensions.  Could we initially assume that there
will be a manageable set of these, and if we're
wrong then we can adopt the "x-" pre-prefix in the
future?

2.  Do the set of Bath searches that I listed look
right? Should we run this by the Bath group?

3. What other well-known prefixes do we want?  One
for Dublin Core? If so, what should that prefix
be?  If we adopt the X- convention then there
isn't a problem, it can be X-dc, and Ralph can use
dc for  his Dark Custard set.  Still, I'd be
happier to just use dc as the prefix for dublin
core.

--Ray