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  January 2005

ZNG January 2005

Subject:

Re: Adlib Base profile

From:

Dr Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:33:41 +0000

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (76 lines)

>> What you're doing is just what cql.anywhere does -- any index
>> which the database knows about. Right?

> Well, not entirely the same: not all Adlib indexes have to be reflected
> in an SRW index. I would like to add a possibility to search *all*
> indexes, not just all indexes that are exported using SRW..

AHHH! :)  The light dawns.

So your index searches all access points in the database, not all indexes
defined in the CQL mapping for that database.  Yes, you can do this.

So the documentation would be something like:

This index performs all searches available in the underlying
implementation, regardless of whether they are exposed in CQL.


>>> And another question: it's possible (and allowed) to map an index to
>>> more than one context set, right?

>> I don't understand the question?

> This index is reachable using dc.title and bath.title; the title index
> is mapped to more than one context set.

Ahh, yes.
The underlying index is mapped to title indexes in multiple context sets.
They could also be differently named indexes, eg ccg.cardNameString

>>> If I may say so: CQL defines a lot of (fortunately optional) pretty
>>> esoteric stuff like word proximity searches and the prox operator, is
>>> prepared for implementation dependent things like relation modifiers.

>> Esoteric perhaps, but absolutely essential in some disciplines. :)

> \begin{unneccessarily vicious remark} I understand, but indeed only in
> *some disciplines*. Then why did these features end up in the "abstract"
> (using your own words from below) CQL language description?
> \end{unneccessarily vicious remark}

Well, the number of disciplines is actually fairly large.  Anything that
needs to search structure will require proximity searches.  Any sort of
full text search will likely require proximity.  Find me books that have
the words "entity relationship diagram" in them will be a LOT larger than
books that have paragraphs with all those words, but the -record- being
searched is still the book.

For example the ZeeRex context set uses proximity to say:
    Find me servers which support dc.title.

The reason we need proximity here is that there's a context set access
point and a index name access point.  But if you search for set = dc and
index = title, you'll find match dc.creator and heraldry.title.  You need
prox here to say that they both come from one field.

Will most disciplines need boolean modifiers?  Probably not, but aren't
you glad we have them?

CQL is abstract because it is not reliant on the underlying data
representation, unlike XQuery, SQL and most other query languages.


> That's a good argument indeed. I'll try not to whine anymore ;-)

It's all good :)  As EA says,  Challenge Everything.

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