OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

search-ws message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Is there any reason to standardize two CQL versions?


I have been working on the CQL 1.2 document. 
 
To review, we've spent the past few months on SRU, prior to that on CQL, specifically on CQL 2.0, and prior to that on CQL 1.2.  The CQL 1.2 document is intended to faithfully represent the CQL 1.2 spec as it is on the LC website, in the form of a single OASIS document.  After we wrapped up an initial draft of CQL 1.2 we spent alot of time on CQL 2.0 and haven't touched 1.2 for many months and the result is that 2.0 is much more polished than 1.2.  So what I have been doing is trying to align 1.2 with 2.0 where applicable, that is wherever we have polished up 2.0, unless it is a change specific to 2.0, apply it to 1.2.
 
What I think I am finding is that the actual query language is unchanged between 1.2 and 2.0, the only substantive changes are in the CQL context set.  (This of course is not the case for the SRU protocol, where there are substantive changes between 1.2 and 2.0.)
 
So, I propose that we standardize only one version of CQL rather than two.   And if so, should we call it 1.2, 2.0, or no version at all?   And of course we would standardize (or register, or publish, or whatever) two versions of the CQL context set.
 
--Ray


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]