W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > June 2007

[Bug 4720] [FT] editorial: 4 Semantics

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 10:09:50 +0000
CC:
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1I22Yw-0005pu-56@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4720

           Summary: [FT] editorial: 4 Semantics
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Last Call drafts
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: minor
          Priority: P2
         Component: Full Text
        AssignedTo: jim.melton@acm.org
        ReportedBy: jmdyck@ibiblio.org
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org


4 Semantics

[1]
para 2
"It specifies how full-text expression can be nested"
    s/expression/expressions/

[2]
XQueryFullTextInteraction.jpg
    The diagram attempts to represent both the static (syntactic) and
    dynamic interactions between the Full-Text extensions and the base
    XQuery/XPath, and I don't think it succeeds. With respect to the
    boxes, each arrow appears to mean roughly "can be nested within",
    but the accompanying text is at odds with this interpretation.
    E.g., At (1), the text "Evaluate to a Sequence of Items" appears to
    be a label for the arrow, suggesting that the process of evaluation
    begins and ends with an XQuery/XPath expression, which is certainly
    not what you want to convey.

[3]
box labelled "FTSelection"
    Note that an FTContainsExpr is not an FTSelection, so the label is
    inadequate. Maybe change it to "Full-Text expression" (which actually
    complements the other box better).

[4]
"tokenized text of atomic values"
    s/of/or/, I think you mean.

[5]
graphic used for arrows
    The use of "3D" arrows makes me imagine that the diagram is
    executing some kind of yaw-pitch maneuver.

[6]
bullets 2 + 3
"expressions can be nested inside FTSelections by evaluating them to a
sequence of items"
"the composability of FTSelections ... is achieved by evaluating the
FTSelections to AllMatches."
    [6a]
    I don't think it's correct to say that nesting/composability is
    achieved by evaluating something. Rather it's achieved by designing
    the language to be closed with respect to a data model (or in this
    case, something more complicated involving two data models). Please
    drop the "achieved by evaluating" connector.

    [6b]
    E.g.:
        Arrow 2 shows how XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 expressions can be
        nested inside FTSelections. When evaluated, an XQuery 1.0 and
        XPath 2.0 expression yields an XDM instance (sequence of items).
        If the expression is nested ...

    [6c]
    For the Arrow 3 blurb, you could just delete:
        "The composability is achieved by evaluating the FTSelections to
        AllMatches."

[7]
"Arrow 4 shows how the result of the evaluation of XQuery 1.0 and XPath
2.0 Full-Text 1.0 and scoring expressions are integrated into the XQuery
1.0 and XPath 2.0 model."
    Consitency dictates that it actually represents how Full-Text
    expressions (specifically, FTContainsExpr) can be nested inside
    XQuery/XPath expressions.
Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 10:09:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:33 UTC