[Wasabi Proposal] XML desktop query language

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen]

2007/1/17, Jean-Francois Dockes <jean-francois.dockes at wanadoo.fr>:
>
> Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen writes:
> > 2007/1/17, Jean-Francois Dockes <jean-francois.dockes at wanadoo.fr>:
> > > The user-level language needs to have a way to force stemming off.
> >
> > I still think it should be an optional thing - as it is now. The
> language
> > supports stemming control, but it is not required. As discussed a bit
> > earlier such extended features should probably be introspectable with a
> a
> > getExtendedFeatures() method (both in simple and live api).
>
> Not sure we understand each other here. I was referring to the simple
> search language from http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/WasabiDraft, and I
> meant that there should be a way for the user to express her wish for an
> exact match, with no transformation of the search term. The backend will
> then do its best. I don't see how the *language* feature could be
> optional,
> not having it would unnecessarily cripple the capabilities of engines
> which
> can switch stemming on or off. Maybe we could simply say that terms
> enclosed in double-quotes are not to be stemmed if possible ?


Ah, sorry. I was still thinking about the xml language, I see now that you
wrote *user-level*  language :-)

Regarding the user-level language now. Perhaps "flying Dutchman" would mean
the unstemmed phrase (if supported), and 'flying Dutchman' (single quotes)
could allow for stemming. This is not completely standard, but it doesn't
break user expectation in horrible ways (as far as I can see).

> Do we all agree that we need to define a user level language as well? +1
> > from me at least.
>
> Yes for me too.
>
> > > I would be much in favour of using the raw user entry here.
> >
> > I would be much in favor of allowing userQuery elements embedded in the
> xml.
> > It does introduce a bit of extra coding work for servers...
>
> I think that I'd prefer to keep xml out of the simple API, but I could
> also
> work with your approach.


We have a tie :-) What do you other guys think? I see two arguments for the
xml language in both simple and live:

 - Common api between live and simple interfaces
 - Both apis can have the powers of both the user-level and the full xml
languages, while still having an easy way of doing direct user queries
without much parsing.

Cheers,
Mikkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/attachments/20070117/3d6f3903/attachment.htm