>>>> [log in to unmask] 21-05-02 10:29 >>>
>On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:00:06AM +0200, Theo van Veen wrote:
>> Wasn't it the idea in CQL to specify completeness and structure in
>> CQL (like truncation) instead of using predefined index names? For
>> example, putting phrases between quotes to distinguish them from
>> words. Maybe I have missed something.
>This was an early proposal, but I remember discussion moving away
>from it because of problems quotes might be required for other reasons,
>so why does it change the meaning of the value. Then there is the
>issue of 'what is a word'? A CQL parser should not be responsible
>for working out what words are (because it wont know the punctuation
>rules a server knows).
>For example, how do I search for the word 'and'? I have to quote it.
>So having quotes change completeness means that I no longer have
>full control on completeness if I want to search for something
>with the word 'and' in it.
>So yes, it was an early proposal, but I recall moving away from it.
>It *might* have also been part of the 'why make things different to
>CCL unless there is a good reason to do so'. CCL does not treat it
>differently - quotes are just used to escape characters and words
>with special meaning.
I am still confused.
- I remember discussions on the use of quotes but I do not remember decisions to move CQL towards CCL.
- In CCL I think we have the same problems with respect to word like "and" and "or".
We have the opportunity to make a nice clean start with CQL. Let's make use of that. I think that "making things different from CCL" is not an issue or an argument in itself, but when we try combine the best of all worlds in CQL, there might be arguments to use things from CCL.
I had hoped on a generic approach with standard index names and operations (like truncation, completeness etc.) where all the "attribute" variants can be constructed in a logical way instead of agreeing on names for each individual "attribute" variant. I favour the approach in which the server tries to find the best match between how a field is indexed and what variant is asked for.