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 2004

ZNG December 2004

Subject:

Re: Adlib Base profile

From:

Dr Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:10:26 +0000

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (115 lines)

>> 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 know about.


> Okay, okay, you're right. I was just being lazy; iterating *all* indexes
> is easier than iterating over all
> CQL-linked indexes. I'll create an adlib.allIndexes index for the
> current behaviour, and program cql.anywhere
> like it should be.

So adlib.allIndexes will search all indexes in the adlib context-set, yes?


>> We actually started this process a month or two back, but got
>> sidetracks -- or maybe mired in excess complexity.
> Are there any concrete results from that discussion, or was it just
> that: a discussion?

Nothing concrete, I think Mike's comment about being mired in complexity
is a good summary of why it fell down.

>>> - The 'encloses' and 'within' operators are implemented using the
>>>   Adlib WHEN operator. Some examples:

>> dc.date within "2000 2004"
>> -> Does the record contain a date between (inclusive) 2000 and 2004

> I'll add a modifier: within/adlib.range=exclusive (or inclusive -
> default, rightexclusive, leftexclusive).
> Makes everybody happy, right? ;-)

If you think that your customers will use the modifier, then go right
ahead :)  (I find it easier to just change the dates by one)

>> foo.rangeOfDates encloses 2002
>> -> Does 2002 fall within (inclusive) the date range in the record.
>> <record>
>>  <dateRange>2000 2004</dateRange>
>> </record>
>> would match the encloses query.

> No they don't. I'm a bit confused now about encloses works. In the
> manual they're not really well defined, if I may say so. If encloses
> specifically needs a two-dimensional index and a single search term,
> Adlib can't support it. But Mike's example (the one which results in the
> empty set) seems to suggest otherwise..

Encloses needs an n dimensional index.  You could also say that a point in
space is enclosed in a volume, or time/space if you want 4 dimensions.

I think Mike's examples were due to not understanding the WHEN operator
exactly, but he at least agreed with my examples.
(Which is good, because I propsed the within and encloses distinction
originally)

> So it's perfectly possible to have a cql.word indexed title, and no
> cql.string index available for the same field.

Right.  It'd be very strange to have a string indexed dc.description, for
example.

> semantics, but then I'd have to throw an error message on every query
> that makes me imply cql.string where the index is actually word, and
> vice versa..

That's exactly what it should do.

> And there's no way to report the index type in a ZeeRex record. I
> already asked our customer whether this is a problem for them but didn't
> hear back from them yet.

You can include a configInfo section within the index, and give the
relations and/or relation modifiers that are available.

This lets you say that you support within for dc.date, but only cql.word
for dc.description.

For example, check out the indexes in:

http://srw.cheshire3.org/services/l5r


> I've extended the profile with a new concept: a prox implementation, as
> far as Adlib can implement it. I'm very curious if any of you can accept
> me defining it the way I did :-) Adlib can't support any of the prox
> functionality as described in the CQL context set..

(Goes to read attachment)

> Then there's still one option question about CQL context set modifiers:
> how do I type check number & isoDate searches? I can either infer those

In my opinion you can determine the structure of the term as you wish,
unless the client has specifically told you the structure to use with a
relation modifier.

   dc.date > "2004-12-25"
is a perfectly obvious query without any further tokens.

   dc.title > "Jaws!"
on the other hand is not obvious (string or word?), but you can still
determine it as you wish.  If the client wanted a string style comparison,
then it should have asked for it specifically.

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

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