[tdwg-tapir] Interpretation of TAPIR filters

[Renato De Giovanni]

Hi Roger,

Yes, I fully agree that the spec should be revised to be clearer 
about data types. I also like the idea of using "string" as a default 
data type. Let's just wait a bit more to see if there are other 
suggestions and opinions.

Best Regards,
--
Renato

On 23 Nov 2007 at 21:22, Roger Hyam wrote:

> Hi Renato,
> 
> I think I follow you - but I'll probably believe it when I see it  
> spelled out in the spec.
> 
> I think some of the sorting stuff should be in the specification.  
> There are some things there that are implied but not expressed.
> 
> 1) schema concepts should/must only be mapped to columns of the same  
> data type in the host database or at least wrappers should act as if  
> they are.
> 
> 2) Values in queries (and parameters) should use the xsd serialization  
> of date (and other things?). It is the wrappers responsibility to  
> present the correctly to the underlying database.
> 
> 3) If the concept does not have a data type the behaviour of orderby,  
> greaterthan and lessthan are undefined? If we stick to XML Schema  
> concept schemas then they default to string so maybe the default  
> should be to act as string.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Roger