Subject: Re: Use of "Scheduling Inbox" & search

From: "Frank Dawson/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 11:37:00 -0400

>Without separate scopes, a server which implements the inbox separately
would have to
>parse the query's WHERE clause carefully to figure out which scope(s) it
applied to.

John:

A conforming CAP server would have to parse the complete query
command...all of the componentes. I think you would agree that the above
argument isn't really valid.

-- Frank

---

From: John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 15:43:03 +0000

Frank Dawson/CAM/Lotus wrote:

> command...all of the componentes.

Yes and no.  First of all, yes, something in the server has to be able to
parse the whole thing; but that something may be an off-the-shelf SQL
library; if inbox items are in a separate table, the upper layers may need
to do some preprocessing, and it'd be nice if that preprocessing can be kept
as simple.

Secondly, the parsing I'm talking about here is more than just transforming
the query into a boolean expression, it's *understanding* the boolean
expression, and processing it into two separate expressions, one for the
inbox table and one for the main table.  This can get pretty messy.

--
/=============================================================\
|John Stracke    | My opinions are my own | S/MIME & HTML OK  |
[email-masked]|============================================|
|Chief Scientist | NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed |
|eCal Corp.      |  by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch |
\=============================================================/