Antw: Re: Revised proposal for QUERY DTD

["Gerhard Dieringer" <DieringG eba-haus de>]

Vivien Malerba wrote:

> ...
> I've had a look at your proposal and here are some comments/questions:
> * I think you are right to put upper case keywords for elements and lowe case
> for attributes, and also for the renaming of the inf, etc
> * Why did you remove the 'id' attribute from the QUERY element? Its purpose was
> to give a name to the query.
> * Why did you remove the 'allfield' element? Do you prefer to mention all the
> fields of a rable rather than using the * symbol?
> * Why did you remove the 'aggregate' element? I think it is usefull to make the
> difference between aggregates and functions.
> * I agree with you on the joins, since you seem to know more about them than me.
> * I agree to move the table and view names as attributes, and the const value
> as an attribute, it is more logical.
> * I agree with your sorting scheme.
> * I also agree on the use of NMTOKEN instead of CDATA
>
> Tell me what your opinion is on the questions I have had so far.
> Regards,
>
> Vivien

The answer to all these questions is very simple:
I didn't remove these elements/attributes because the version that I started with (send to gnome-db-list at 18.04.2000) did not contain them. 
If you send me your last version, I will try to merge the changes.


Gerhard