>> Please note that this allows for:
>> dc.title = (dc.identifier any fish)
>> Which to my mind is meaningless and the grammar shouldn't allow it, but to
>> Mike's mind is equivalent to just:
>> dc.identifer any fish
> Certainly. What else?
It's meaningless. It says:
Search for terms in title that are terms in identifier that are fish
> No. It is also useful when you do
> my.defaultindex my.defaultop = (q)
> where q is a sub query. It allows developers or users to supply
> semantics for _unqualified_ terms - not only the totally useless
> serverChoice scr.
Or ... you just qualify them properly.
If you know that my.defaultindex exists then you could just put that into
the slot where the index actually should be.
"serverChoice scr" is not useless, it fills a very real need for
situations when the agent generating the query does not know the best
index to search and leaves it to the server to decide.
> For example:
> dc.mydefaultindex any (dc.author = hansen and mankind)
> which is equivalent to:
... the much simpler ...
> dc.author = hansen and dc.mydefault.index any mankind
> You have rejected the proposal and useful construct a number of times.
> Don't tell me you don't want fix the defect because it is difficult to
> implement :-)
Nope. I don't want it because it only adds complexity, not power. Adding
it does not add any new possible queries. Everything could be expressed,
more easily if sometimes more verbosely, using the existing rules.
It's useful to you because your PQF allows it and hence your server allows
it. But I struggle to see any situation when it is useful in the real
world over actually spelling out the clauses properly.
,'/:. Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'--/::(@)::. Dept. of Computer Science, Room 805
,'---/::::::::::. University of Liverpool
____/:::::::::::::. L5R Shop: http://www.cardsnotwords.com/
I L L U M I N A T I