[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CAP: Badly formed SQL
Doug wrote on 01/10/2002 03:32:23 PM:
> If you did that in SQL you would get data. It might not
> be the data as sited in the text.
Whoa! I thought we agreed a long time ago (DC IETF) that we were NOT using SQL as the lingua. We were going to be SQL like. As such, we dont need to make the queries "valid SQL" as long as our format can be mapped to any desired engine (including SQL).
Did this change and I not see it?!?! Given all the discussion of late about our examples bieng valid or invalid I suspect some think that we are using SQL as the query langage and are not SQL like any more. This was never discussed or agreed on!
> Correct - but we did agree that a person that knew SQL would
> be able for form a query given our 'virtual database' mapping.
So then all the other threads under assorted topics about our queries being valid or invalid SQL are moot, no?? We just need to be clear what we mean by and so someone can map it to valid SQL (or some other engine).
> We also agreed and it is (or used to be) in cap were it said
> that each data set that was returned would be encapsulated
> in a BEGIN/END VCALENDAR. So if you got the data from
> 10 components, you would get 10 BEGIN/END VCALENDAR objects
Huh!? When did this happen? There is no reason I can think of now to justify this. After all the ABNF for iCalendar allows multiple VEVENTS, VTODOS, etc to be inside 1 single VCALENDAR. So why do we have to return 10 VEVENTS inside separate VCALENDARS???!!!