I have created the http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-1779
for this issue and have added your comments and alternatives. If I forgot
something please add your comments.
cheers
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008
>
> Saul's right, we just need escaping. Yet, jdeolive made me notice that
> in WFS 1.1 there is the "@gml:id" expression that can be used to
> signify the id of a feature. This open two possibilities.
> TXT (and CQL) could simply use @gml:id = 'states.1' as an expression
> that gets parsed as a
thanks a lot for your replies!
On Thursday 17 April 2008 11:16:21 Andrea Aime wrote:
> Mauricio Pazos ha scritto:
> > Hi, we was preparing the land to extend CQL. You could see the scope in
> > the following link:
> >
> > http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/TXT+Language+Analysis
> >
> > Now
Mauricio Pazos ha scritto:
> Hi, we was preparing the land to extend CQL. You could see the scope in the
> following link:
>
> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/TXT+Language+Analysis
>
> Now I have some doubt about the ID Predicate, that is:
>
> #road.1, #road.2, #road.47
>
> As you ca
Indeed. '#' can be troublesome in web requests (if not escaped
properly).
Also, it shouldn't matter what the "ID" character is in CQL ('@','#',
etc.) as long as there is a way to 'escape' that character when it
appears as a part of the query. I.e., if there's a '\#' character pair,
then that's t
Andrea and Chris we were talking about this a bit yesterday on email
As CQL is used often in GeoServer I would like to check if "#road.1"
syntax be okay encoded in a GET URL? Or should we ask Mauricio to use a
different symbol - "@road.1,@road.2" etc...
Jody
> Hi, we was preparing the land
Hi, we was preparing the land to extend CQL. You could see the scope in the
following link:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/TXT+Language+Analysis
Now I have some doubt about the ID Predicate, that is:
#road.1, #road.2, #road.47
As you can see it is a sequence of "fids" preceded by "
