> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Taylor [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 7:00 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: index definitions
>
> I honestly do not imagine that one single person in the whole world
> will look at this document in order to understand the semantics of a
> CQL qualifier. Seriously: can you imagine it? "Now, what does
> titleWord mean? Oh, I see it's defined as the combination of _this_
> attribute from the Utility Set, and _this_ one from the Cross Domain
> set, and _this_ one from the BIB-2 set. I wonder what these
> 'attribute' thingies are?"
Now I spend a lot of time laughing at the Semantic Web folks, but their goal
is admirable and the problems they are trying to address are real. I've got
an ItletayOrdsWay index and I'd sure like for clients to know that is
contains words from title fields. I don't think the name of the index
helped much. Is there some mechanism that I can use to provide those
semantics?
The best one I know of is the new attribute architecture. Is it
complicated? You bet. But the only alternative is to keep crossing our
fingers and hoping for the best. I'm tired of hoping that black magic is
going to make things work right.
Ralph
|