Steve,

> I think the problem here is the fact that the subranging and the
> "list"-ing part are being mixed.
>
> As I see it, they're separate ideas that don't need to be considered
> together.

I completely agree.

> Issue 1: The fact that "In" clauses are evaluated as if they were a
> chain of "OR's", as in


> Issue 2: It might be nice (i.e., "syntactic sugar") to be able to say
> "1,2,3,4" with "1-4", or more likely, to avoid 1-4 looking like "-3",
> with "1..4".


> Personally, I'd love to see the first feature implemented.

> I've had
> cases where the ability to specify an "In :List" as a parameter would
> have been very useful.

Again, I completely agree.

The "IN LIST" feature would resolve 99% of issues I have with the IN
clause.

The "short-cutting" of the list is at best a 'nice to have'.


Sean