- From: Alan Kent <ajk@mds.rmit.edu.au>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 11:24:43 +1000
- To: www-zig@w3.org
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 03:07:35PM -0400, LeVan,Ralph wrote:
> > Yup. Not only that, but Rob's observation applies to CQL too, which
> > after all intends to model the Type-1 query quite closely. You'd just
> > use CQL qualifiers with the appropriate util, bib2 or dclib
> > qualifiers, mixed and matched as required. Something like --
> >
> > util:creator,bib2:personal,dclib:agentDetail=Kernighan
>
> We've not agreed to any syntax like that and the sense at the ZIG meeting
> was to not allow it. But, what that would mean in SRW and what I think you
> think it means are two different things.
>
> I think you mean for that to be a combination of attributes from multiple
> Attribute Sets to generate an access point. We don't do that in SRW. We
> use indexes which are externally predefined combinations of attributes from
> any attribute sets. The only possible interpretation of that query in SRW
> is that you want Kernighan as either a util:creator or a bib2:personal
> (huh?) or a dclib:agentDetail (huh?). Sort of like author,subject=levan
> might mean that you want to find levan as either an author or a subject.
> (But it could be author AND subject which is why we're not going to support
> it.)
Another way to achive the above sort of thing is using the attribute
overlay scheme I talked about earlier. Its not perfect, but you could
express the above in (extended) CCL with our system as
utilCreator= @personal(@agentDetail(Kernighan))
Basically the @function() adds additional attributes to that term.
Alan
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2002 21:25:16 UTC