Re: Whois++ constraints

Mark Prior <mrp@itd.adelaide.edu.au> Thu, 08 April 1993 08:41 UTC

Received: from aggie.ucdavis.edu by ucdavis.ucdavis.edu (5.61/UCD2.04) id AA11585; Thu, 8 Apr 93 01:41:18 -0700
Received: from ucdavis.ucdavis.edu by aggie.ucdavis.edu (5.61/UCD2.04) id AA19242; Thu, 8 Apr 93 01:09:35 -0700
Received: by ucdavis.ucdavis.edu (5.61/UCD2.04) id AA10479; Thu, 8 Apr 93 01:04:42 -0700
Sender: ietf-wnils-request@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu
Received: from jarrah.itd.adelaide.edu.au by ucdavis.ucdavis.edu (5.61/UCD2.04) id AA10114; Thu, 8 Apr 93 00:53:52 -0700
Received: by jarrah.itd.adelaide.edu.au with SMTP (5.61+IDA+MU/UA-5.26) id AA06871; Thu, 8 Apr 1993 17:21:28 +0930
Message-Id: <9304080751.AA06871@jarrah.itd.adelaide.edu.au>
To: Peter Deutsch <peterd@bunyip.com>
Cc: ietf-wnils@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu
Subject: Re: Whois++ constraints
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 08 Apr 1993 03:14:39 -0400." <9304080714.AA26846@expresso.bunyip.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1993 17:21:27 +0930
From: Mark Prior <mrp@itd.adelaide.edu.au>

     > Can we please agree to change the syntax for the constaints before our
     > respective servers are released.
     >
     > I would suggest the following syntax
     >
     > <keyword> [ "=" <value> ] { "," <keyword> [ "=" <value> ] }

     I see no problems with this as the general structure of
     global constraints, although we'll obviously have to watch
     things to be sure that the BNF allows for the various
     legal constaints and options. One example that comes to
     mind is that I've been assuming so far that we can allow
     only one of the possible output format specifiers per
     query. Ditto for search type and so on.

By the way I intended this syntax to be used for the local constraints
too, which have the same problem if you try to apply more than one
constraint to the term.

Mark.