On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 11:06:58 AM Andrea Aime wrote: > Err... what if someone tries to build a ogc catalog on top of GeoTools? > There would be value in having a CQL parser that can flag invalid CQL > expressions. This is a good point, to not deprecate CQL. A short reflection: Searching in similar experiences (Lisp vs Common Lisp; C vs C++, ...), as user, I would like to use a richer language to express what I want. On the other hand, if you has got a limitation (maybe functional requirement) you can use the canonical syntax (but not validate). Backing to catalog, I have two possibility to express a query, cql and ecql , as user why I should use the poorer (cql). ? Is the ogc-cql a better language to consult metadata?
> I mean, generally speaking all that would be needed is a validator, but > wondering if > building a validator without doing also the parser is possible > I think that parsing is the only process to validate the syntax language > Cheers > Andrea -- Mauricio Pazos ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ GeoTools-GT2-Users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-gt2-users
