On Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:52:20 AM Andrea Aime wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Mauricio Pazos
> 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
> > 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?
> 
> Using OGC protocols is about, among other things, to being able to switch
> between platforms, so some users want to make sure they are not
> using vendor extensions.
> Having a strict validator is a way to ensure you are not using such
> extensions.
> Good documentation is another
> 
> Cheers
> Andrea
> 
> -- 
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Tech lead

It looks like the CQL is becoming the COBOL in the GIS business :D. 
-- 
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

Reply via email to