Interesting problem:
- My technical direction was to be strict superset of CQL, so although I think
it looks funny, the solution of id{'fid1','fid2','fid3'} is a strict superset.
(sigh).
However: even CQL has the problem of a conflict between keywords and property
name references; ie cannot have an property name called 'not' for example. Do
they provide any guidance on this one?
If we need to patch both CQL and ECQL then I would like to use the same quote
solution as SQL to minimise the any learning curve.
Jody
On 28/05/2010, at 4:40 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Mauricio Pazos ha scritto:
>>> Pity that "ID" cannot be used, it would have been backwards compatible
>>> (I think).
>> Yes, it could be a problem, I am thinking in this cases to query by fid
>> "ID" like "city.1"
>> "ID" = 1
>> ID in (...)
>> I think it could be confuse
>
> Yeah, I agree it could be a bit confusing... at the same time it would
> not break uDig usage of ECQL. Jody? What is your preference, using " to
> be able and use keywords as field names or moving to a custom sytanx
> that cannot be mistaken for something else like:
> id{id1, id2, ...}
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
>
> --
> Andrea Aime
> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
> Expert service straight from the developers.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geoserver-devel mailing list
> Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
