|
From: Andrea A. <and...@ge...> - 2011-03-29 07:53:29
|
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Mauricio Pazos <mau...@ax...> wrote: > On Friday 25 March 2011 05:57:05 pm Andrea Aime wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 4:44 PM, LSA <ls...@ng...> wrote: >> > Thanks Andrea! >> > >> > Can I always use ECQL instead of CQL, or there are some drawbacks with >> > it? >> >> It should be mostly (but not 100%) a superset of CQL, can't think of >> any specific drawback. >> >> Cheers >> Andrea > Hi, ECQL includes CQL, so I can confirm there is not any drawback. Hi Mauricio, I actually did notice one thing that was working on CQL but not in ECQL. attribute eq 'value' works in CQL but won't be parsed by ECQL Cheers Andrea -- ------------------------------------------------------- Ing. Andrea Aime GeoSolutions S.A.S. Tech lead Via Poggio alle Viti 1187 55054 Massarosa (LU) Italy phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 962313 mob: +39 333 8128928 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://geo-solutions.blogspot.com/ http://www.youtube.com/user/GeoSolutionsIT http://www.linkedin.com/in/andreaaime http://twitter.com/geowolf ------------------------------------------------------- |