Subject: the taxonomy

From: Gene Wuu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 93 17:15:29 EDT

Dear colleague,

I would like to ask this group 
(1) whether we all understand the taxonomy of queries
(2) whether we all agree with this taxonomy and its level of classification

I post these questions because I do not understand it completely,
nor am I conviced this level of classification is necessary.
(I appreciate the systematic approach to the classification of queries.)

If the majority of this group have affirmative answers to the above two
questions, then I obviously have a lot home work to do.

-Gene Wuu

---

From: "Rick Snodgrass" <rts>
Date: Wed, 12 May 1993 14:45:47 MST

I'll give my personal answers to Gene's questions.

(1) I do not understand it in all of its detail. However, I think
that the best way to understand it better is to attempt to write
queries according to the taxonomy.

(2) I feel that it is a very good first step. After we have experience
with it, in writing queries, we will probably want to amend and extend
it.

Unless people find specific problems with the taxonomy, and are prepared
to recommend specific solutions, I recommend that we proceed with it for
now. The workshop is in exactly one month, and I fear that further
general discussion about the taxonomy will cause us to miss this
deadline.

I volunteer to handle the classes

O3.S1 (Duration, Interval, Computed), returning both an explicit attribute(s)
	and a valid-time component

O3.S2 (Duration, Interval, Other), returning both.

There are approximately 150 queries to write (30 classes, each with ca.
5 queries). Two classes (10 queries) seems reasonable to request of
each of the authors. There is still time to write all 150 queries in
parallel, producing a highly-useful initial benchmark.