- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:29:47 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6198 Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #1 from Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org> 2008-11-06 23:29:47 --- Christian, your report has merit, but recall that the meaning of weight values is implementation-defined (or is that -dependent?). There is nothing in the spec that says that a weight of 0.0 means "ignore this part of the query", so the assumption that the query should return nothing is mistaken. We all believe, of course, that a query term with a weight of 0.0 should be considered "less relevant" or "less important" than a query term with a weight of 999.999, but that's not guaranteed by the spec. Nonetheless, it's probably appropriate to give two alternate possible results -- one as it's already specified, but the other as "empty result". It is perfectly reasonable, even though not required, that an implementation would choose to interpret 0.0 to mean "completely irrelevant". Thanks for the report. I'll go ahead and add that second alternative result, so I'm marking this bug as FIXED. If you agree with this resolution, please mark the bug CLOSED. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2008 23:29:57 UTC