doc/book/en/annexes/rql/implementation.rst
branchstable
changeset 5312 d2dbba898a96
parent 4446 a413fac5ff5e
child 5393 875bdc0fe8ce
--- a/doc/book/en/annexes/rql/implementation.rst	Fri Apr 16 14:39:42 2010 +0200
+++ b/doc/book/en/annexes/rql/implementation.rst	Fri Apr 16 16:40:25 2010 +0200
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
 
 Implementation
 --------------
+
 BNF grammar
 ~~~~~~~~~~~
 
@@ -126,7 +127,7 @@
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 - The current implementation does not support linking two relations of type 'is'
-  with a OR. I do not think that the negation is supported on this type of
+  with an OR. I do not think that the negation is supported on this type of
   relation (XXX FIXME to be confirmed).
 
 - Relations defining the variables must be left to those using them.  For
@@ -140,11 +141,11 @@
 
   is not.
 
-- missing proper explicit type conversion,  COALESCE and certainly other things...
+- missing proper explicit type conversion, COALESCE and certainly other things...
 
-- writing a rql query require knowledge of the schema used (with real relation
-  names and entities, not those viewing in the user interface). On the other
-  hand, we can not really bypass that, and it is the job of a user interface to
+- writing an rql query requires knowledge of the used schema (with real relation
+  names and entities, not those viewed in the user interface). On the other
+  hand, we cannot really bypass that, and it is the job of a user interface to
   hide the RQL.