- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <Kjetil.Kjernsmo@computas.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 11:10:25 +0200
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On Tuesday 05 May 2009 00:30:09 Orri Erling wrote: > If the WG committed to standardizing full text in SPARQL to be according to > XPATH , we would implement. But without this WG decision, we > would stay with what we have, which is familiar to SQL people and easy to > process from a text search box. What you have have worked pretty well for us! :-) I tend to agree that if we want full-featured fulltext search capabilities, then rolling our own is overkill and counter-productive, but I am concerned that also using something like Xpath would be too much for this WG and too much for many implementers. Thus, if people require things like multiple-language stemming and a score, then yes, they would need to go all the way, but a very simple matching function, like you have now (and which is simpler than Andy has in LARQ), is an awful lot better than nothing (like you say, nothing in this area is a terrible option). Thus, we may want to let people optionally have ftcontains and a mechanism to add a score to the result set or graph, but require only something a lot simpler. I hope we can discuss this tomorrow, but we have not that much time to decide, so I think a bit of mailing list traffic on this topic is useful. Kind regards Kjetil Kjernsmo -- Senior Knowledge Engineer Mobile: +47 986 48 234 Email: kjetil.kjernsmo@computas.com Web: http://www.computas.com/ | SHARE YOUR KNOWLEDGE | Computas AS PO Box 482, N-1327 Lysaker | Phone:+47 6783 1000 | Fax:+47 6783 1001
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 09:10:51 UTC