> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:34:36 -0500
> From: "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Since we agree that cql and srw will have independent versions, how
> will a client convey the cql version?
>
> For that matter if cql is used outside of srw, how is the version to
> be indicated?

Sheesh, guys, enough with all these hard questions already!  :-)

I am half inclined to write this off as "out of band agreement".  I
don't think any of us wants to see more new syntax in CQL to have
queries specify what CQL version they're using.  Don't forget that,
for the SRW case, the CQL version can be disovered from the ZeeRex
record.  (That's conceptually true, at least -- Rob can tell us
whether the current ZeeRex DTD actually has space for this
information, and he can fix it if it doesn't.)

> And the cql context set -- do we assume that its version is the same
> as the cql version?

I don't think that's a good idea.  Clients that care enough to want to
nail it down can use the existing prefix-mapping mechanism to specify
a particular version's URI, like this.

BTW., Rob, the CQL set's documentation at
        http://srw.o-r-g.org/cql/contextSets/cql.html
has gone away.

 _/|_    _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <[log in to unmask]>  http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "When the substitute enters the field of play [...] the player
         whom he is replacing ceases to be a player" -- FIFA law 3,
         paragraph 5.6

--
Listen to my wife's new CD of kids' music, _Child's Play_, at
        http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/childsplay/