LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ZNG Home

ZNG Home

ZNG  December 2003

ZNG December 2003

Subject:

Re: XCQL - its purpose and prefixes

From:

Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:31:17 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (85 lines)

Robert Sanderson wrote:

>>>then realised my model was not quite right for generating XCQL. I have been
>>>resolving prefixes while parsing the CQL. To generate XCQL it seems
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>parse tree you can of course generate XCQL, but the prefixes within XCQL
>>would be different and machine generated (since the original prefixes
>>names are gone).
>>
>>
>
>I don't understand why this follows (as my parser doesn't do that :) )
>
>
Your parser keeps the prefixes yes. A parser which resolves prefixes to
URI indexes, etc will _not_ keep the prefixes used. It's redundant
information and it therefore should be thrown away.

>
>class Prefixed:
>   prefix = "dc"
>   prefixURI = "http://.../"
>   value = "title"
>
>   def __str__(self):
>     return "%s.%s" % (self.prefix, self.value)
>
>(Obviously simplified)
>
>Then Prefixed is the parent class for index, relation,
>relationModifierName and booleanModifierName ... anything that can have a
>prefix.
>
>Then as you go through you can step up looking for prefixes and put the
>URI into prefixURI, keeping the user's name in prefix.
>
>
>
>
>>We don't use XCQL much. If anything, it's good as a debugging tool.
>>
>>
>
>Yes.
>
>
>
>>>An alternative way (not necessarily better) of doing things is to not
>>>include prefixes, but rather have the prefixes all expanded. That is, in the
>>>
>>>
>>I share you view on this.
>>
>>
>
>The parser may not know how to expand the prefix because it's relying on
>the server's defaults from the Explain document.
>
>I don't see a need to change the XCQL, especially as it's not often used.
>(apart from to add an element for modifier comparison)  It's not broke,
>no need to fix it to something which is just different.
>
>
I agree, even though (as you know) I'm not keen on XCQL WRT prefixes.
But since it's not used a lot, I don't care much.

-- Adam

>Rob
>
>--
>      ,'/:.          Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
>    ,'-/::::.        http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
>  ,'--/::(@)::.      Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
>,'---/::::::::::.    Nebmedes:  http://nebmedes.o-r-g.org:8000/
>____/:::::::::::::.
>I L L U M I N A T I
>
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started.

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager