Adam brings up an interesting point.

Why not something like '=/exact'?

Sort of explicitly tells the server what to do on what would seem like
the logical relation to use for equality.

-Ross.

On 7/31/06, Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Robert Sanderson wrote:
> >>> I'm going to flipflop and prefer '==' to 'eq' now, because I don't think
> >>> that the disadvantage of == is real :)
> >> How about just forget about == . Use rel modifiers when one need to
> >> distinguish between different kinds of "equals".
> >
> > Because without == or eq, we don't have an equality relation at all :/
> > (Given that = isn't 'equals' it's 'please do the right thing')
> So scr is still here .. in the form of =. That's confusing.
>
> = should be  "same as" / "similar".. We expect it to find something that
> matches.. Of course that depends on the context ..
>
> / Adam
>
> >
> > Rob
> >
> >
>
>