> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:34:07 +0100
> From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
> I am still in favour of having a default srw indexset containing all
> dc, dcterms and bath names. Especially when we are going to avoid
> things like having gils.title and dc.title and bath.title.
Once more, there is no single "default" CQL context set. Each
application chooses its own default. (And the only exceptional rule
is that the "cql" set is the default _for relations and modifiers
This is _good_ news for you, Theo. Although I think your idea is a
bad one, there is nothing I or anyone else can do to stop you making
the "theo" set, defined precisely how you wish (e.g. including
synonyms for all the DC, Bath, etc. indexes) and making that the
default context set for your application. Go nuts.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "Your passion for God will never exceed the level of your
revelation of _his_ passion for _you_." -- Mike Bickle.
Listen to free demos of soundtrack music for film, TV and radio