[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [search-ws] multiple query types
But wouldn't (4) give the same backwards compatibility? And (as I think Ralph pointed out last time we discussed this) it would make the protocol seem less cql-oriented. And pardon my typo, I said: "(4) Use (4) except there is no standard default, the default is sever dependent and exposed via explain." when obviously I meant: "(4) Use (3) ......" --Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dr R. Sanderson" <azaroth@liverpool.ac.uk> To: "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov> Cc: <search-ws@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [search-ws] multiple query types > > (3) Use (1) with the additional stipulation that queryType is optional, and > > it defaults to CQL. > > 3 please, backwards compatability is important. > > R >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]