2007/1/25, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen <<a href="mailto:mikkel.kamstrup@gmail.com">mikkel.kamstrup@gmail.com</a>>:<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> I updated <a href="http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/WasabiSearchLive" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/WasabiSearchLive</a> with a new property hit.properties.extended . I also added a new method GetQueryExtensions for introspecting which Wasabi query language extensions are supported (as was more or less agreed upon a while back). I'm really glad that it seems that we are finally converging on something :-) Unless someone come screaming soonish this is probably close to what will be the first public proposal (completing Milestone 1 when we have a user-level search language agreed upon). </blockquote><div> I have some thoughts that might warrant a last-minute change/addition just before MS1 (this tuesday)... The initial motivation for splitting in a Simple and a (complex) Live dbus API was to allow search engines to only implement the Simple api. But the current proposal merges the two apis[1]... I suggest we add some way to introspect whether the search engine supports the "block" and "live" (and other) session properties. There are three options as I see it:  1) Add a method GetSupportedSessionProperties which returns a full list of all supported properties (this also allows search engines to not support sorting by any given field), all other properties are considered unsupported.  2) Add a return value to SetProperty() the return value could fx be the actual value used in the property. Then apps wanting live search could assert ("true" == SetProperty(session, "live", "true")). This would also allow "read-only" properties.  3) Rename GetQueryExtensions to GetEngineFeatures() and include *also* supported properties in the result list (this way we'll have a big mix of allowed query extensions and session properties) </div> I'm in favor of 2). Any other suggestions, or comments? Cheers, Mikkel [1]: <a href="http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/WasabiSearchLive">http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/WasabiSearchLive</a> </div>