Fw: OASIS/SRU: XCQL - do we need it

["Ray Denenberg" <raydenenberg@starpower.net>]

>I count on that parsed query in the response for Scan responses.

(I want to take this discussion back here momentarily so not to enter into a
scan discussion before we introduce it.)

There is no query in a Scan request so you're not getting back a parsed
query, you are getting back xml that conveniently coincides with a portion
of the XCQL you would have gotten if it had been a query.

So, if we determine that this capability is useful only in scan (and
assuming we retain Scan) then we shouln't be calling it XCQL, right?  We
should find another name for it.

--Ray

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "LeVan,Ralph" <levan@OCLC.ORG>
To: <ZNG@sun8.LOC.GOV>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: OASIS/SRU: XCQL - do we need it


Mike Taylor's CQL parser will return an XCQL version of a query.  I
return XCQL in all my responses.

I count on that parsed query in the response for Scan responses.  That's
the only way a thin client can know what index was scanned so that
useful queries can be made of the returned terms.

Ralph

-----Original Message-----
From: SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors
[mailto:ZNG@loc.gov] On Behalf Of Ray Denenberg
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 10:02 AM
To: ZNG@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV
Subject: OASIS/SRU: XCQL - do we need it

Sorry -  I forgot to change subject line


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>
To: <ZNG@sun8.LOC.GOV>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 9:46 AM
Subject: Fw: OASIS/SRU: Parameterized Query


> This is the third of a number of topics initiated by the OASIS Search
Web
> Services Technical Committee, for discussion within the SRU list.
>
>  Issue: XCQL - do we need it?
>  Issues List: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/search-ws/issues
>  Issue Id: farrukh-1
> Thread:
http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/search-ws/200710/msg00041.html
>
> There is a  suggestion is to eliminate XCQL (an XML representation of
the
> CQL query, not used in a request, only in the echoed response). Some
> implementors claim it is useful to have the query echoed in a parsed
form,
> but its existence causes confusion (people sometimes think it is an
> alternative representation to be used in the request) and adds
complexity,
> and unless it is being used, it should be considered for elimination.
>
> The Committee solicits feedback on XCQL. In particular, who has
implemented
> it and found it useful? Who would object to it being removed from the
> standard?
>
>  --Ray Denenberg