Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus URILiteral vs node

On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 12:21 +0200, Christian Grün wrote: > Hi Liam, > > I have added ft:thesaurus,  You really are beyond the awesome. Thank you so much! I hope to have a chance to experiment kater this month, but if there's a gap i'll look much sooner. Liam -- Liam Quin, 

Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus URILiteral vs node

Hi Liam, I have added ft:thesaurus, and I have revised our documentation [1,2]. I think that the new function may contribute to a more sophisticated search code written in XQuery. The implementation is still subject to change; I’m looking forward to your feedback. Christian [1]

Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus URILiteral vs node

On Mon, 2021-05-31 at 15:05 +0200, Christian Grün wrote: > >   let $thes := ... >   let $term := 'happy' >   let $relation := 'RT' >   let $levels := 1 to 10 >   let $terms := ft:thesaurus($thes, $term, $relation, $levels) >   return 'lucky' contains text { $terms } > > Do you think that could

Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus URILiteral vs node

Hi Liam, I spent some more time with the XQFT thesaurus specification, and I decided it would be too invasive to make the thesaurus input fully dynamic. There are simply too many rules and optimizations that depend on a static source. It would certainly be easier to define a new helper function

Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus URILiteral vs node

On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 14:35 +0200, Christian Grün wrote: > Hi Liam, > > That would certainly be possible. The major challenge will be to make > it effiicent. Thank you for replying! It might be that i can solve my need differently - i want to implement a Google-search-like syntax for a Web

Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus URILiteral vs node

Hi Liam, That would certainly be possible. The major challenge will be to make it effiicent. Most of the XQFT arguments have been designed to be static, and if we allow something like… $text contains text { $term } using thesaurus $node …the value of $node might change with every iteration.

[basex-talk] thesaurus URILiteral vs node

What would be involved in extending BaseX's full text to allow a thesaurus to be supplied as a node instead of a URI? I want to construct one on the fly, and using file:write() seems excessive. Liam -- Liam Quin, https://www.delightfulcomputing.com/ Available for XML/Document/Information

Re: [basex-talk] Thesaurus question

> Would it be possible to create a custom index structure in > BaseX that would get around this limitation? If yes, as you seem to suggest > below, can this be done dynamically? I had difficulty following the example > in [2]. Could you please give me more hints on what you don’t understand?

Re: [basex-talk] Thesaurus question

Christian, I will second your description of this logic as “nonintuitive”. It seems to be driven more by efficiency concerns than usability (on the part of the W3C). Would it be possible to create a custom index structure in BaseX that would get around this limitation? If yes, as you seem to

Re: [basex-talk] Thesaurus question

> Any idea why? Yes – See one of my previous replies ;) In a nutshell: In the first query, stopwords will be dropped. In the second one, they will only be ignored (“Tokens matched by stop words retain their position numbers […]” [1]): "A B C" contains text "A C" using stop words ("B") →

[basex-talk] Thesaurus question

Hi, Given this thesaurus entry http://www.w3.org/2007/xqftts/thesaurus;>                 and       USE       I was expecting the following query to return true (file path omitted for clarify) 'Frontier Science and Technology Research Foundation, Inc.' contains text 'Frontier Science

Re: [basex-talk] Thesaurus question

Hi Ron, I’m pretty sure that the default tokenizer discards the ampersand and doesn’t pass it on as token at all. Hope this helps (…at least for understanding the query result), Christian On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Ron Katriel wrote: > Hi, > > Given this thesaurus

Re: [basex-talk] Thesaurus question

Thanks, Christian. You are right about the tokenization of ampersands. However, I still see unexpected behavior with the built-in stop words. 1. This works (using your clever stop word workaround, slightly modified with string-join): let $sw := map:merge(    for $sw in

Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus

Hi Xavier, sounds like a bug. Feel free to provide me with the full version of the Thesaurus (I'll have a look at it in Jan 2014). All the best, Christian On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Xavier-Laurent SALVADOR xavier-laurent.salva...@univ-paris13.fr wrote: Hi, waiting

Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus

On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 21:52 +0200, Xavier-Laurent SALVADOR wrote: Hi, waiting for Christmas, i was playing with Basex. I had no problem for using a short Thesaurus i built a few days ago. But when i tried to use the extended one (26Mo), i get this error message. I see Christian has already

Re: [basex-talk] thesaurus

Thank you for your answers. You're probably right, i will try on tomorrow. I downloaded 7.7..2, and i fragmented the thesaurus in 6 smaller files i exported from basex. When using thesaurus at a small thesaurus (5 Mo), basex 's cool. When using a larger one (25 Mo), basex fails and a new message

[basex-talk] thesaurus

Hi, waiting for Christmas, i was playing with Basex. I had no problem for using a short Thesaurus i built a few days ago. But when i tried to use the extended one (26Mo), i get this error message. Is this a problem of mine ? Here is an extract of my thesaurus: thesaurus