Subject Re: Searching by range
Author jeffplata
Hi Geoff, Jason,

--- In, Geoff Worboys <geoff@t...> wrote:

> The hyphen character ('-') is not that uncommon in various
> names and similar texts, and as the sign in number texts. I
> guess you could limit this interpretation to number and date
> fields (where range is most common) and only use it if it
> occurs between digits (not at the start or end). Another
> alternative would be '..' which seems unlikely to occur in
> normal texts.

Like this?
BETWEEN 12-000 AND 12-999
12-000 - 12-999 (or 12-000 .. 12-999)
How about
"12-000" - "12-999"

> As for the comma as a list separator, I am guessing that that
> may be OK. I see where you currently support the use of
> commas in an IN clause with numbers by using ', ' as the item
> separator where the locale uses ',' as the decimal separator.
> Similar distinction would presumably occur if you decided to
> remove the need for the surrounding IN( ) text. If there have
> been no objections so far then this approach could continue.
> Personally...
> I like the idea of something to make BETWEEN work better (but
> probably with '..' rather than '-', it is so verbose at the
> moment that it is difficult to use in small controls.


> I dont really think it is worth it for 'IN'. It is not verbose
> now and does not really need anything better.

Yes, IN( ) is not much to type. But for the sake of intuitiveness and
user-friendliness (and saving a few keystokes) I'd vote for the plain
comma separated list.

What I have in mind, when I suggested about this is to have an
alternative way of expressing the BETWEEN and IN criteria, without
scraping what is already in place. I'm sure there's no problem about
the present implementation with many users specially those are
accustomed to c/s and sql. But, IMHO, it would be nice if there is
alternative, easier and more intuitive way of expressing the criteria.

So, could it be possible that IBO support two ways of defining search