LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


ZNG@C4VLPLISTSERV01.LOC.GOV


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: New proposed grammar for CQL (revised from Yacc grammar)

From:

Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Mon, 1 Dec 2003 11:20:34 +0000

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (72 lines)

> >>If people want 1.1 finished soon, I raise the option of leaving out
> >>indexes on parenthesis groups for post 1.1 to allow people to think
> >Yes please.

> What are people afraid of? Is it difficult to implement? Difficult to
> understand? Difficult to describe?

Yes to all of the above.

dc.title = ( dc.author = fish )

I see no reason to make that legal as dc.title is just a waste of time,
making the query less readable for no gain.

dc.title = (fish or cat)

I see no reason to make that legal either, as we can do:
    dc.title any "fish cat"
and have the same result for no gain.

dc.title = (dc.author any fish or cat)

Is just ugly.  Is cat searched in author or title?  Yes, I'm sure there's
a right answer but to me (who's fairly technical) that answer is not
readily apparent.  To my partner (who's not technical at all, but
understood Mike's CQL tutorial in one reading) it would be totally opaque.
No gain.

It's harder to implement ...

(you need to constantly check the type of 'term' when processing and
resolve clauses/booleans/strings, rather than knowing they'll be strings.
*[1])

... harder to understand ...

(try describing dc.title = dc.author = fish to someone who's not
technically inclined, rather than dc.author = fish and seeing which they
grasp)

... and harder to describe ...

(The semantics are understandable, but the idea is to have a useful but
understandable to novices language.  Describing how to resolve which
index is in effect is more difficult).

The proposal in my view doesn't gain us anything and loses both
readability and understandability.

I don't mind if Indexdata's parsers implement it, but I am not going to
try and describe why such queries should be legal to end users of CQL, who
are supposed to be not technical people.

Rob

1:

And then we need to decide the scope of term describing relation modifiers:

 dc.date any/iso.YYYYMMDD ( dc.author =/cql.string "fish" and "20030224" )
 geo.location within/geo.box/geo.pointFormat  ( ... )

Please No!

--
      ,'/:.          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

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2017
October 2016
July 2016
August 2014
February 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
February 2013
January 2013
October 2012
August 2012
April 2012
January 2012
October 2011
May 2011
April 2011
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager