 |
 |
"LeVan,Ralph" wrote: > I think we've gotten to the point that we have to concede that we have not > built a language for end users. On the contrary, I think we hit a stone wall on this question some time ago; what's changed? No matter what we do with cql there will be clients that convert from a user interface to cql and there will be users who key in cql directly. And the invention of xcql as an alternative was a concession/compromise to keep cql at least minimally user-friendly. I'm in favor of moving forward, quickly, with some form of the proposal on the table. --Ray