Jos: Replying to xdg, hope it's ok...<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2007/1/16, Jos van den Oever <<a href="mailto:jvdoever@gmail.com">jvdoever@gmail.com</a>>:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
2007/1/16, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen <<a href="mailto:mikkel.kamstrup@gmail.com">mikkel.kamstrup@gmail.com</a>>:<br>> I updated the schema quite a bit to reflect your feedback :<br>> <a href="http://grillbar.org/wasabi/drafts/wasabi-query.xsd">
http://grillbar.org/wasabi/drafts/wasabi-query.xsd</a><br>><br>> Changes:<br>> - Split out selectors in two groups. extendedSelectionTypes and<br>> selectionTypes. Selectors in the last group are mandatory, but the extended
<br>> are optional.<br>> - Add lessThanEquals, greaterThanEquals, and startsWith selectors to base<br>> selectors.<br>> - Add regExp extended selector. Rename distance to proximity selector.<br>> - Move a whole bunch of attributes to the string type. See the
<br>> stringAttributes and extendedStringAttributes.<br>><br>> I'm in a hurry right now, so I'll have to elaborate later. Cheers,<br>><br>> Mikkel<br>><br>> PS: I still want to tweak the proximity selector a bit, by moving the
<br>> distance specifier to an attribute<br>><br>> PPS: There is now more documentation inside the schema it self, so I hope it<br>> makes more sense now.<br><br>Hi Mikkel,<br><br>Ah another spec. I've not even had time to start implementing the
<br>first. ...</blockquote><div><br>Don't implement any specs yet! If we're following the roadmap (<a href="http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/WasabiRoadMap">http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/WasabiRoadMap</a>) we should have an official proposal ready by 24/1. This will be a proposal until it has had a month of evalution by various interested parties before we finalize it.
<br><br>There has not been any responses to the roadmap, so I have to assume everyone is ok with it... If you decide to follow up on it please do so in the Roadmap thread.<br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
- I like the tendency towards using uris for fieldnames. This fits<br>nicely with the RDF ideas currently in fashion in Tracker and Nepomuk.</blockquote><div><br>Unfortunately we have to wait until after the api+language spec to settle on those - then we'll be nearing the topic of your original thread! :-D (see roadmap again)
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> - Can you somehow add a way to let the user know which feature of the<br>spec are implemented? You could name the different features and let
<br>the search engines have an introspection method that gives back the<br>list of implemented features.</blockquote><div><br>Yes. As the language spec stands now there is a core set of features you must support and then an optional extended set of features that cannot be expected from all indexers. I also think we should have some introspection method for these extended features.
<br><br>There are both extended attributes and elements, but with a naming convention a method like (in both simple and live apis):<br><br>getExtendedFeatures(out as feature_names)<br><br>could do. A return value of ["fuzzy", "regExp"] would translate to "I support the fuzzy string attribute, and the regExp selector".
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> - Stemming is a tricky business. It required language recognition and<br>there are a few more snakes in the grass. I'd prefer to have stemming,
<br>if included, be optional and certainly not the default.</blockquote><div><br>It is in the extendedStringAttributes now. Following my previous example you would add "enableStemming" to your getExtendedFeatures response if you support it.
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> - Will there be test suits so that we can test how well the spec is followed?
</blockquote><div><br>I hope so. They are not mentioned in the roadmap however, I would really really like a wasabi-compliance test suite. <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
To Jean-Francois and Fabrice: how about a shared LGPL C++ lib for<br>getting a C++ object from the xml?</blockquote><div><br>Allow me to answer anyway :-) : Yes please! In the roadmap is also mentioned toolkit bindings. So the Qt-inclined of you may also want to colloborate on that...
<br></div><br>Cheers,<br>Mikkel<br></div>