On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 17:41 +0000, Mike Taylor wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:26:23 -0500
> > From: Sebastian Hammer <[log in to unmask]>
> >> But to summarise the relationship between CCL and CQL: the
> >> intention when CQL was being design (initially by Ralph, and
> >> subsequently by the SRW editorial board as a whole) was that it
> >> should be pretty much a superset of CCL, and that it therefore sets
> > AFAIK, one of the crucial differences (unless this was changed in
> > CQL?) is that the CCL spec doesn't require quotes around multi-word
> > terms... this makes the grammar and parsing of CCL queries somewhat
> > more challenging.
> (And, by the way, the absence of that facility in CQL is a mistake.)
But a good mistake in terms of getting people to actually implement it.
Dr Robert Sanderson
Dept of Computer Science, University of Liverpool