Whoops, let me try to finish that thought, sorry, I went back to look again at your example just as the Web mail client prematurely sent the message.
You're actually asking about a joiner that expands the list to a shotgun OR of constrained queries.. I think it could be done using a custom joiner modelled on NEAR. --C Colleen Whitney MarkLogic Corporation Phone +1 650 655 2366 email [email protected] web www.marklogic.com This e-mail and any accompanying attachments are confidential. The information is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this e-mail communication by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by returning this message to the sender and delete all copies. Thank you for your cooperation. ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Colleen Whitney [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:20 AM To: MarkLogic Developer Discussion Subject: Re: [MarkLogic Dev General] Search 'in' clause Hi Gavin, I think it could be done by writing a custom prefix operator, along the pattern of the - (not) operator in the built-in grammar. If you look at parser output from from this query: ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Gavin Haydon [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:02 AM To: General List Subject: [MarkLogic Dev General] Search 'in' clause Hi In the search API is there any way for the grammar to allow something like an 'in' clause with a list of values. The underlying cts queries can be given a list of values, so it would be useful if the higher level search grammar could pass such a list down. For instance, given a defined constraint called 'subject' you could do something like: subject IN (foo, bar) Where the comma is a configured separator. Instead of: subject:foo OR subject:bar Given a long list of values, would this not be more optimal than a sequence or OR terms? Regards Gavin Haydon _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
