No prizes for spotting the deliberate mistake ;-)

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Matthew Dovey 
	Sent: Wed 15/01/2003 21:35 
	To: Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative; [log in to unmask] 
	Cc: 
	Subject: RE: Re: CQL + GEO
	
	
	Could these relations be generalised
	 
	contains or hasPart or isSubsetOf
	isContainedBy or isPartOf or isSupersetOf
	 
	and defined in a generic utility set?
	 
	Matthew

		 
		-----Original Message----- 
		From: Robert Sanderson [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
		Sent: Wed 15/01/2003 17:33 
		To: [log in to unmask] 
		Cc: 
		Subject: Re: CQL + GEO
		
		

		> I say, go ahead.  At least your experiences can prime
the pumps of the
		> design process.  Easier than designing in a vacuum.
		
		I think we need two new relations, and one modifier:
		
		encloses        Data is range, term is point/range
		within          Data is point, term is range
		      /partial