Re: [Fwd: Re: CAP-12-a: Stored queries still?]

[Bernard Desruisseaux <bernard.desruisseaux@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Doug Royer wrote:

> Bruce_Kahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > Doug wrote on 09/04/2003 11:22:35 AM:
> >  >                           There was nothing new to reply to. Same
> >  > question, same answer.
> >
> > Actually its more like same question, same non-answer. 
> > Everyone from 2 of the other editors to Andrea question the usefulness 
> > of this feature in CAP 1.0 given our inability to achieve the original 
> > intent.  You seem to be the only one steadfastly opposed to removing 
> > it from CAP.
>
>
> Bruce - 4 people replied today - two said yes (me and it looks as if
> Bernard by replying is saying yes, you said no, and Andrea
> said no). Bernard proposed the NAME/QUERYID change - do you want
> us to think that that means 'NO' to stored queries?

My reply was simply clarifying that if CAP were to support stored
VQUERY components, one should use the QUERYID property, and not
the NAME property, when making reference to stored VQUERY components.

As for where I stand with the stored VQUERY issue, like Bruce and
Andrea, I don't see a real benefit from using stored VQUERY as
they are currently specified, and as such I would remove all
references to them in CAP 1.0.

Cheers,
Bernard


> And you just posted TODAY - so don't you feel just a little
> bit embarrassed that you declare 'Everyone from 2 of the other
> editors...' question ... it?
>
> And you have failed to find *anything* that supports your
> assertion of the 'original intent'.