>> Ick. >> That is exactly the right way to do it. > Also true. Bad, isn't it? :-) >> The way I typically handle this is to create an artificial index that >> combines the two fields so you could do a search like: >> Ralph.setAndIndex exact "info:srw/context-set/1/dc-v1.1:title" > > This is precisely the other approach that Rob and I discussed Yep. > I am (and I think Rob is) genuinely torn between the purity of the > proximity model and the pragmatism of the all-in-one-index model. Also yep :| Which is why we in turn wondered about a somewhat less confusing 'sameField' boolean modifier. 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