I think that is a very viable idea, and one that a few people have done with David's CT for the Sciences book. The biggest issue from a pedagogical standpoint is that the computational category theory implemented for CQL is only a fraction of the CT universe, and of course it is tailored for data integration purposes, so words such as "entity" and "foreign key" are used in place of "object" and "generating morphism". But CQL is a pretty thin veneer over co-pre-sheaves and change of basis functors.
We created a number of predecessors to CQL while we explored its design space; some of these, in particular "FQL++" have a different set of operations; for example, it can express monads on Set, which CQL cannot. Those (non-industrial strength) languages are archived here:
https://github.com/CategoricalData/FQL.
Ryan
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Categorical Data" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
categoricalda...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/categoricaldata/93da8f02-0291-4e09-bdde-9ed116f3c070%40googlegroups.com.