RE: Extend basicsearch

Well,

instead of extending DAV:contains, you might use a custom DASL extension
(unless you're happy with a server not knowing your extension syntaxtfalling
back to it's default behaviour).

Julian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wallmer, Martin [mailto:Martin.Wallmer@softwareag.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:58 PM
> To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
> Cc: 'Julian Reschke'
> Subject: RE: Extend basicsearch
>
>
> Hi,
>
> thanks for quick reply. What do you mean by "custom function"?
>
> Martin Wallmer
> Research & Development
> Software AG 			++49 6151 92 1831
> Uhlandstr. 12
> D 64297 Darmstadt
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2002 14:28
> To: Wallmer, Martin; www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
> Cc: Pill, Juergen
> Subject: RE: Extend basicsearch
>
>
> Basically,
>
> what a server does with DAV:contains is completely open. So, yes, your
> server could use an extension like this (I'd propably define a custom
> function or move the path into an attribute instead, though). And no,
> there's nothing like this in the standard.
>
> Julian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Wallmer, Martin
> > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:18 PM
> > To: 'www-webdav-dasl@w3.org'
> > Cc: Pill, Juergen
> > Subject: Extend basicsearch
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > once again a question about extending the basicsearch,
> concerning content
> > based issues.
> >
> > Suppose the server stores XML documents, and I want to find all
> documents
> > greater than 10000 bytes and concerning the patient "Otto", I'd like to
> > write
> >
> > ...
> > 		<d:where>
> > 			<d:and>
> > 				<d:gt>
> > 					<d:prop>
> > 						<d:getcontentlength/>
> > 					</d:prop>
> > 					<d:literal>10000</d:literal>
> > 				</d:gt>
> > 				<d:contains> [patient/name = 'Otto']
> > </d:contains>
> > 			</d:and>
> > 	</d:where>
> >
> > where the server defines, that <contains> expressions enclosed
> in brackets
> > are interpreted as xpath filter. Would that be covered by the
> standard? Or
> > would it make sense to introduce a new optional "%content_ops"
> > operator, say
> > xpathfilter, to handle this?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Martin Wallmer
> > Research & Development
> > Software AG 			++49 6151 92 1831
> > Uhlandstr. 12
> > D 64297 Darmstadt
> >
>

Received on Thursday, 10 January 2002 09:01:13 UTC