> Meawhile though:
> "fuzzy"| "stem"|"relevance"
> came from you. Are these broadly supported?
> I'd be happy to remove these too.
Actually, they came from Alan also. They can go for now, but will probably
be back someday.
> > I'd prefer W/ and N/ (within and near) to % and !. I've
> never seen those
> > characters used for proximity.
> Not sure I understand. You mean W for "in order" and N for
> "any order"?
> (And related to this, I notice that ":" is no longer a
> rel-op -- quite
> > right, since it was synonymous with "=" anyway. So I
> suggest that we
> > redeploy ":" in the syntax for result-set-expression --
> > "resultSet" ":" identifier
> Well ok I've made this change, but am tempted to change it
> back. Personally I
> like the symmetry of "index = term" and "resultSet = identifier".
If you don't want to keep ':' as a synonym for '=', then drop it completely.
I agree with Ray's comment above.