W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > March 2005

Re: [FT]FTUnaryNot

From: Sihem Amer-Yahia <sihem@research.att.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:53:09 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200503222153.j2MLr9b610270039@chips.research.att.com>
To: andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au
Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org


Dear Andrew,

You will soon get an official response from the Full-Text group that
will address your concerns in more details.

Thanks,
Sihem

>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:49:25 +1100
>From: andrewc <andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au>
>Reply-To: andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au
>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
>X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
>Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="------------070605080605090704090606"
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on 
>	mail-brown.research.att.com
>X-Spam-Level: 
>X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_30_40,
>	HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TITLE_EMPTY autolearn=no version=3.0.1
>Content-Length: 8891
>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>--------------070605080605090704090606
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Dear Sihem,
>
>Thank you for your reply.
>The question comes from when I evaluate "occurs at most 2"  and the 
>keyword appears 4 times in context node.
>I evaluate it as "occurs not at least 3" using negation over "occurs at 
>least 3".
>I realize that Result 1 is better than Result 2.
>
>Regards,
>Andrew
>
>Sihem Amer-Yahia wrote:
>
>>Dear Andrew,
>>
>>Sorry for the late reply. We have been busy with getting a new draft
>>of the language document ready. FYI, a new version of the draft will
>>be accessible soon.
>>
>>We should get back Result 1.  The reason is that the input AllMatches
>>may have been obtained from a combination of full-text FTSelections
>>such as distance and ordered and that the only thing a negation (i.e.,
>>FTUnaryNot) does is to say that those matches in its input AllMatches
>>are to be excluded and it is thus not allowed to "merge" matches as
>>you did in Result 2.
>>
>>What is the intuition behind Result 2?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Sihem
>>
>>  
>>
>>>Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:15:47 +1100
>>>From: andrewc <andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au>
>>>Reply-To: andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au
>>>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
>>>X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
>>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>>Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au does not designate permitted sender hosts)
>>>X-Original-To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
>>>X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4230F143.80202@cisra.canon.com.au
>>>Resent-From: public-qt-comments@w3.org
>>>X-Mailing-List: <public-qt-comments@w3.org> archive/latest/5988
>>>X-Loop: public-qt-comments@w3.org
>>>Sender: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org
>>>Resent-Sender: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org
>>>Precedence: list
>>>List-Id: <public-qt-comments.w3.org>
>>>List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
>>>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on 
>>>	mail-brown.research.att.com
>>>X-Spam-Level: 
>>>X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham 
>>>	version=3.0.1
>>>Content-Length: 1339
>>>
>>>
>>>Dear editors,
>>>
>>>Regarding the semantics of FTUnaryNot.If we have an AllMatches 
>>>(queryString and queryPos are omitted):
>>>
>>>AllMatches
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 2)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 3)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 4)
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 1)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 2)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 3)
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 1)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 2)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 4)
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 1)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 3)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 4)
>>>
>>>If we apply the FTUnaryNot on the above AllMatches, which result shall 
>>>we get back (Result 1 or Result 2)?
>>>
>>>Result 1:
>>>AllMatches
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 2)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 3)
>>>     --- StringInclude (pos = 4)
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 1)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 2)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 3)
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 1)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 2)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 4)
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 1)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 3)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 4)
>>>
>>>Result 2:
>>>AllMatches
>>>--- Match
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 1)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 2)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 3)
>>>     --- StringExclude (pos = 4)
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>
>--------------070605080605090704090606
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
><html>
><head>
>  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
>  <title></title>
></head>
><body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
>Dear Sihem,<br>
><br>
>Thank you for your reply.<br>
>The question comes from when I evaluate "occurs at most 2"&nbsp; and the
>keyword appears 4 times in context node.<br>
>I evaluate it as "occurs not at least 3" using negation over "occurs at
>least 3".<br>
>I realize that Result 1 is better than Result 2.<br>
><br>
>Regards,<br>
>Andrew<br>
><br>
>Sihem Amer-Yahia wrote:<br>
><blockquote type="cite"
> cite="mid200503211912.j2LJCQ8h10230519@chips.research.att.com">
>  <pre wrap="">
>Dear Andrew,
>
>Sorry for the late reply. We have been busy with getting a new draft
>of the language document ready. FYI, a new version of the draft will
>be accessible soon.
>
>We should get back Result 1.  The reason is that the input AllMatches
>may have been obtained from a combination of full-text FTSelections
>such as distance and ordered and that the only thing a negation (i.e.,
>FTUnaryNot) does is to say that those matches in its input AllMatches
>are to be excluded and it is thus not allowed to "merge" matches as
>you did in Result 2.
>
>What is the intuition behind Result 2?
>
>Thanks,
>Sihem
>
>  </pre>
>  <blockquote type="cite">
>    <pre wrap="">Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:15:47 +1100
>From: andrewc <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au">&lt;andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au&gt;</a>
>Reply-To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au">andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au</a>
>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
>X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>Received-SPF: none (lisa.w3.org: domain of <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au">andrew.cao@cisra.canon.com.au</a> does not designate permitted sender hosts)
>X-Original-To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:public-qt-comments@w3.org">public-qt-comments@w3.org</a>
>X-Archived-At: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.w3.org/mid/4230F143.80202@cisra.canon.com.au">http://www.w3.org/mid/4230F143.80202@cisra.canon.com.au</a>
>Resent-From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:public-qt-comments@w3.org">public-qt-comments@w3.org</a>
>X-Mailing-List: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:public-qt-comments@w3.org">&lt;public-qt-comments@w3.org&gt;</a> archive/latest/5988
>X-Loop: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:public-qt-comments@w3.org">public-qt-comments@w3.org</a>
>Sender: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org">public-qt-comments-request@w3.org</a>
>Resent-Sender: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org">public-qt-comments-request@w3.org</a>
>Precedence: list
>List-Id: &lt;public-qt-comments.w3.org&gt;
>List-Help: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.w3.org/Mail/">&lt;http://www.w3.org/Mail/&gt;</a>
>List-Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe">&lt;mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe&gt;</a>
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on 
>	mail-brown.research.att.com
>X-Spam-Level: 
>X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham 
>	version=3.0.1
>Content-Length: 1339
>
>
>Dear editors,
>
>Regarding the semantics of FTUnaryNot.If we have an AllMatches 
>(queryString and queryPos are omitted):
>
>AllMatches
>--- Match
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 2)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 3)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 4)
>--- Match
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 1)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 2)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 3)
>--- Match
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 1)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 2)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 4)
>--- Match
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 1)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 3)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 4)
>
>If we apply the FTUnaryNot on the above AllMatches, which result shall 
>we get back (Result 1 or Result 2)?
>
>Result 1:
>AllMatches
>--- Match
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 2)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 3)
>     --- StringInclude (pos = 4)
>--- Match
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 1)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 2)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 3)
>--- Match
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 1)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 2)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 4)
>--- Match
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 1)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 3)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 4)
>
>Result 2:
>AllMatches
>--- Match
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 1)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 2)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 3)
>     --- StringExclude (pos = 4)
>
>Thanks,
>
>
>
>
>    </pre>
>  </blockquote>
>  <pre wrap=""><!---->
>
>
>  </pre>
></blockquote>
></body>
></html>
>
>--------------070605080605090704090606--
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 22 March 2005 21:53:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:23 UTC