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 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