W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > September 2006

[Bug 3738] [FT] Organization -- FTMatchOptions

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 19:17:26 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1GPOcQ-0004Kr-Ov@wiggum.w3.org>


           Summary: [FT] Organization -- FTMatchOptions
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Working drafts
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Full Text
        AssignedTo: jim.melton@acm.org
        ReportedBy: holstege@mathling.com
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org

Organizational (Major editorial)
Read section 2.4 (Extensions to Static Context) and then into section 3
(FTSelections).  There is a discussion of FTMatchOption as prolog settings, but
you don't find out anything about what those match options are for another 20
pages or so.  You don't even get a list of what those options are.  The minimal
fix is to also include the FTMatchOption production in section 2.4 or with the
first set in section 3, but I don't think that is enough. Since we have recast
the semantics of match options so that mainly that apply to how tokenization
and matching is done, I think they can move much further up into section 3.  I
can see two ways to slice this: (A) right after FTWords and shift the compound
query operators to later different major subsection (this is how regular folks
tend to think about this: tell me what a basic word query looks like, tell me
the bells and whistles on that, now tell me about your fancy compound queries)
or (B) flip sections 3.1 and 3.2. I think option A is better, but requires more

Similarly in section 4:
As with section 3, I found myself wanting to know about match options much
sooner. Having to wade through all the oddball operators to get to basic match
options just feels wrong. Add to that the complication of having to redefine
the semantics of what you thought you understood up to that point, and it seems
even worse to me.  And if you look at what we actually say about match options
now, I really don't see a need to postpone them. I suggest moving all of the
match options up to right before the section on FTWords, except put the
fts:applySearchTokensAsPhrase in that section (the real one, not the dumbed
down version).
Received on Monday, 18 September 2006 19:17:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:14 UTC