- From: Marcus Jager <mjager@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 11:33:57 -0700
- To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
Hi, Ummm, Did I miss something or didn't we need the datatypes so the server knows how to perform the relational operators (ge,le,... ) on the dead properties. Marcus. > -----Original Message----- > From: Babich, Alan [SMTP:ABabich@filenet.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 12, 1998 20:32 > To: Saveen Reddy (Exchange); www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > Subject: RE: datatyping is not needed > > 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 Monday, 13 July 1998 14:33:41 UTC