I may have missed something, but what were the objections to:
eq ne gt lt ge le ?

The way I see it this would provide consistency, avoid the =/== typo
bugs, and bypass the situation where < and > have to be encoded
specially in HTML search forms, example queries etc.

I realise that existing CQL parsers would need modifying to accommodate
these, but they'd need updating for whatever equality operator is
decided upon, wouldn't they?

John

-- 
              '.    ,'.         John Harrison
             '  `  '  '         University of Liverpool Library
 c h e s h i r e  |  3          e: [log in to unmask]
                  v             w: www.cheshire3.org
              `·..;.·           t: 0151 7943142
                ..,     (c)     f: 0151 7942681