- From: Babich, Alan <ABabich@filenet.com>
- Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 20:32:29 -0700
- To: "'Saveen Reddy (Exchange)'" <saveenr@Exchange.Microsoft.com>, www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
Yes, you have stated my position correctly. Having the datatypes in the advertisement of query capabilities is enough for me. Clients can choose to ignore it or use it. (In fact, clients don't even have to perform query capability discovery if they don't want to.) Having datatypes in the "where" condition as well would be redundant, and I do not propose we do that. (I seem to remember that you astutely pointed out the redundancy at the Redmond meeting and that I agreed with you.) Hopefully we're violently agreeing: Jim says "its less filling" (the query condition is not decorated with datatypes), and I say "it tastes great" (the datatype information is available in the query capability information), and we're both right. But I would quibble a little bit with you on your wording of my position on the UI issue. I do not claim we have to make the UI EASIER. I claim we have to make QUALITY UI's POSSIBLE. That's a very different thing. You're right, though, we're doing a protocol design, not a UI design. A good protocol design provides all the necessary information, and it is not unnecessarily hard to generate or process. Right? Only the ease of generating and processing the protocol might make the UI code easier or harder, not the information providable via the protocol. The UI's potential for quality could only be affected by what information is providable via the protocol, not by the ease of generating or processing the protocol. Alan Babich -----Original Message----- From: Saveen Reddy (Exchange) [mailto:saveenr@Exchange.Microsoft.com] Sent: July 07, 1998 1:30 PM To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org Subject: RE: datatyping is not needed I'll respond first to the UI issue. Alan, making UI easier, while a good thing, isn't a fundamental scenario we have to address. If dropping datatyping meant that it didn't make this easier, I could still sleep at night. As for the second part ... it doesn't seem like you guys disagree (and you even point this out). Jim's position (please Jim clarify if I am missing it) is that datatyping is not absolutely needed in the query expression. Alan, your position seems to be that datatyping is needed in query schema discovery. Do I have this correct? Thanks, Saveen
Received on Sunday, 12 July 1998 23:35:26 UTC