What is the point of the truncation attributes rolled into structure
attributes?  I don't remember any discussion of this.

Ralph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 5:52 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: word masking reconsidered
>
>
> Given recent discussion let's reconsider the
> proposal we've put up for  word masking. Should we
> withdraw it? After all, it's purpose was to
> support cql searches, and if we're back to
> defining word indexes, we don't need it, as long
> as we have a way to map to Z39.50 attributes --
> which we do for attribute architecture but not for
> bib-1.
>
> So I suggest the following:
> 1. withdraw the word masking proposal.
> 2. propose three new structure attributes for
> bib-1:
>     left-truncation on word boundary
>     right-truncation on word boundary
>     adjacentWords
> 3. If these attributes aren't accepted then we
> just map to attribute-architecture-friendly
> combinations.
>
> --Ray
>