[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Multiple Query Types
I’d like to bring up the topic of multiple query types
again. I think we have eliminated the use of a query-type parameter
as a solution. This would have used the query parameter to carry queries
of all types and the query-type parameter would have specified how the query
was to be interpreted. Explain records would have listed the types of
queries supported by the server. The objection to this parameter is that
it adds another parameter to the query (and the documentation). A simpler solution is to use the name of the query parameter
itself to indicate the type of query. For instance, our current query
parameter might be renamed CQLQuery and a new query parameter of LuceneQuery
might be specified to support Lucene queries. One way to do this would be to have the standard specify the
parameter to be used for every type of query we can think of. The Explain
record for the database would again list the supported query types. This
simplifies interoperability, but leaves the standards body with the perpetual
task of adding new search types. My preference is that the standards body not specify the
name of the query parameters. Instead, the Explain record, which already
lists the supported query types, also specify the name of the associated query
parameter. This allows for much easier local extensibility. The objection to this scheme is that trivial
interoperability goes away: So, here’s my compromise position: do it my way.
Well, that and have the standards body create a profile where we specify the
names of the parameters for query types that we think might be useful/common. Feedback would be appreciated! Ralph |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]