Nicks comments on cql-2-0-draft-feb-4-2010.doc

["Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>]

I have processed all of Nick's comments 
(http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/search-ws/email/archives/201002/msg00012.html)
on the CQL document except the  following.

> 73: Protocol Model is misleading: CQL is a language, not a processor

The section heading "Protocol Model" is not to imply that CQL is a protocol 
but simply that the is a protocol model into which CQL fits.  I'm not seeing 
what's misleading.


> 387: Shouldn't there be a conformance level for supporting all of CQL, as 
> opposed to merely parsing it?

Supporting ALL of CQL has never been a conformance level because I don't 
think we ever contemplated that anyone would implement all of it.
For discussion next call.


> 682: "name=jones prox/container=author date=1950" : you'll need to explain 
> how an index like author can have the internal structure necessary to 
> realise this query --- although any such internal structure is presumably 
> stripped out of the CQL index.

For discussion.

> 1135: Biblio Context set and Biblio examples should be in the same annex: 
> they cannot be read independently.

For discussion.


Thahnks, Nick, for the review and comments.

--Ray