At 07:02 PM 12/15/2004, Mike Taylor wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:15:31 +0000
> > From: Dr Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
> > cql.anyField ?  I don't like cql.record as a name, as to me that would
> > imply that a string search should be matched against the entire record,
> > rather than any subfield within the record.
>
>Agreed -- your name is better,

I get a sense that this discussion crossed over the
"abstraction layer" line. On the search side of things,
the abstraction should not reference "fields" but "indexes".

cql.anyIndex might be better (assuming the semantics of
it makes clear its distinction from cql.anywhere).