On Wed, 15 Dec 2004, Mike Taylor wrote:
>> From: Dr Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
>> I think that's exactly what cql.anywhere means. Search all indexes that
>> you know about, but you can't be expected to search indexes that you don't
> Well, I will leave it to the profile author to say whether that was
> what he meant. I read the Adlib-specific definition to mean that they
> wanted "anywhere" to mean "in any of the Adlib access points only".
Then I would suggest:
adlib.anywhere Search in any of the indexes defined in the adlib context
set.
>>>> - The adlib.record meta-index searches the whole record. The
>>>> operator doesn't matter. This is a slow search since no index can
>>>> be used.
>>> Perhaps we should consider adding cql.record for whole-record
>>> searching (where supported).
>> (a) You send some terms and it searches the entire record. (And how is
>> this different to cql.anywhere in practice?)
> For Adlib, there _is_ an implementation difference between (the
> putative) cql.record access point on cql.anywhere. in that the latter
> makes use of all the indexes that are to hand, but the former makes a
> physical scan of all records, so it can even find the term in fields
> that are not indexed. As I implied, not every server will implement
> this (which is fine) but it does seem like a useful distinction for
> those that do.
cql.anyField ? I don't like cql.record as a name, as to me that would
imply that a string search should be matched against the entire record,
rather than any subfield within the record.
Also, if the text isn't indexed at all, how do you determine where to
start matching and where to end?
>>>> - The 'encloses' and 'within' operators are implemented using the
>>>> Adlib WHEN operator. Some examples:
>> Here are some uses for within and enclose:
> Isn't this what I said?
Probably =)
>>> This is _not_ what "=" means in CQL. It means that the term is
>>> word-structured, irrespective of the index being searched, unless
>>> overridden by a relation modifier.
>>
>> I disagree, Mike. It means, currently, exact equality, but does not
>> say how equality is to be determined.
> Au contraire. This is precisely the difference between "=" and
> "exact".
=/cql.number must surely mean exact numeric equality?
>> So you have to treat dc.date = "2004-12-25" as a word? or a string?
> Hmm. Your example is strangely provoking.
> I must retreat to my cave and meditate.
:)
Rob
,'/:. Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
,'--/::(@)::. 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
|