On 15/01/2014 09:09, Diego Bosc? wrote: > I agree that sometimes regular expressions can be tricky, and surely > they don't look pretty on its current form. However, but they have an > advantage: They are formal and easily evaluated in any language. The > problem I see with this approach is that you will need a single > ontology (or access to it) to be able to assure that the meaning is > the same for everyone. Also you will have to forbid more radical > changes that are being made on the archetypes (changing its root > entity, for example). > > Also, if this approach is taken, precise rules and clarifications are > needed. e.g. in the last example, are 'massage' children allowed? (in > other words, does EXCEPT refer to the children too or not?). Are there > some kind of precedence rules implied? These kinds of things should be > formally defined in any case.
I agree with all of that - this is more or less why it wasn't done this way before. It might need to be a 1.6 or 2.0 addition... - thomas
