RE: FTS comments

By all means, your feedback is appreciated. And any feedback that points out problems with future directions will be appreciated....

Viel Glueck mit Deiner Doktorarbeit...
Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kai Großjohann [mailto:kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 4:21 AM
> To: Michael Rys
> Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Re: FTS comments
> 
> "Michael Rys" <mrys@microsoft.com> writes:
> 
> > 1. As I mentioned in a separate mail, the use cases should encompass
> > functionality that the consensus in the WG considers to be important
> > for discussion for the first version more than giving a repository
> > of all possible use cases in the area of information retrieval.
> >
> > 2. Your use case of application of SCORE to non-text conditions is
> > captured in the requirements document mainly for allowing
> > researchers, vendors and at some point in time the WG to add such
> > functionality. I personally consider that to be an important use
> > case in the future, but do not see it as an important feature for
> > this release and thus having it as part of the use cases seems a bit
> > premature.
> 
> Nobody is asking you to save the whole world in two days :-)
> 
> I'm just saying that there are two important fields, DB and IR.  Doing
> querying on XML documents, for me, is half IR and half DB.  But the
> current XQuery effort appears to be something like 0.1 IR and 0.9 DB.
> 
> If things stay this way, then XQuery will become something that is
> useful for the DB community, but it won't be useful for the IR
> community.  People who want to build an IR system for XML documents
> won't be able to use XQuery as the standard, not even with the
> currently discussed FTS features.
> 
> There was a panel discussion during the XML-IR workshop at the SIGIR
> 2002 in Tampere, and the impression I got was that the XQuery effort
> is not currently useful for IR and that folks are eager to help out,
> if only they were asked.
> 
> I'm just a lowly PhD student who should rather be working on his
> thesis.  But I had the urge to go out and wave the IR flag at least a
> little bit, to do what little I can.  (I'm dreaming of a
> probabilistic version of XQuery but will have to settle for a
> probabilistic version of XPath, and that will be quite incomplete.
> But it is going to include vagueness and uncertainty as central
> concepts, in all parts of XPath.  I don't even dare dreaming of a
> probabilistic RDF (yet?).)
> 
> 
> If you say that XQuery/FTS needs its first version soon, then maybe
> the way to go is to ask some IR folks to make sure you're not
> preventing XQuery from being developed in the general direction of IR
> later on.  Then you can save the big discussion for XQuery/FTS version
> 2.
> 
> 
> Thank you for listening.
> --
> A preposition is not a good thing to end a sentence with.

Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2003 11:41:34 UTC