In todays meeting we compared the library science CQL which uses
"foo/bar.baz" with the OGC CSW CQL which uses "foo.bar.baz" - sigh :)

- https://www.loc.gov/standards/sru/cql/spec.html
- http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=20555

--
Jody Garnett


On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 10:12, Andrea Aime <[email protected]>
wrote:

> HI Devon,
> agree with the others that the best is to do a round trip test.
> Just mind, while in memory a nested attribute reference should be xpath
> like, a/b, while encoded
> in CQL it should be a.b. So make sure it works fine both ways, I'd do two
> round trip tests:
>
>    - Start with "a/b" as PropertyName, encode and decode, you should be
>    getting back a PropertyName as "a/b"
>    - Start with "a.b" as a CQL string, decode and encode, you should get
>    back "a.b"
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 6:41 PM Devon Tucker <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Working with the Filter -> CQL code recently (CQL.toCQL) I noticed that
>> it is not producing correct CQL for attribute names. For example the
>> following test case fails:
>>
>> https://gist.github.com/dvntucker/1d7f8c227eea44d9bd1563f0269e4b6a
>>
>> There are a number of issues here, but the biggest one is the
>> forward-slash instead of a period, which is not correct by the CQL spec.
>> Also, this identifier does not need to be quoted and I don't think quoting
>> identifiers is in the CQL spec either.
>>
>> It looks like this is mainly an artifact from the parsing phase, where
>> the periods are replaced with slashes to match XPath. I believe this part
>> is correct, but needs to be corrected when producing CQL output. My only
>> worry with changing this is potentially people relying on this behavior.
>> Looking through GS/GT, it doesn't appear that this code path (Filter->CQL)
>> is used a whole lot, and in fact where it is seems very likely to fail
>> because of this (forward slash in identifier doesn't parse).
>>
>> Anyone see an issue with fixing this behavior?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Devon
>> _______________________________________________
>> GeoTools-Devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards, Andrea Aime == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
> Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054
> Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339
> 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
> ------------------------------------------------------- *Con riferimento
> alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 -
> Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni
> circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali
> allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i
> destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per
> errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le
> sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended
> only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from
> disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679
> “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information
> herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
> have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by
> telephone or e-mail.*
> _______________________________________________
> GeoTools-Devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>
_______________________________________________
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to