2007/9/14, Arun Raghavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On 9/14/07, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snip> > > Man I love speaking to myself :-) Anyways, I just completed (4). Check > it > > out at http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/XesamQueryLanguage > > and gimme the flames... > > Looks good! > > One question -- is: > > <fullText> > ... > </fullText> > > equivalent to > > <equals> > <fullTextFields/> > ... > </equals> > > or > > <contains> > <fullTextFields/> > ... > <contains> > > or neither? If either. isn't <fullText> redundant? > > Also, I think some more documentation (or an example) of what the > vendor.extensions property is supposed to look like would be nice.
It would most closely match the example with the contains selector i guess. The point in the fullText selector is that it is weakly defined. It can do more elaborate matching than the straight contains selector. Some implementations could incur some level of fuzziness or something. Maybe the fullText description should stress this. Something like: "Search in everything that makes sense and match to the best of the engines ability. The most basic matching would be equivalent to the contains selector, but more elaborate matching, fx via fuzzyness, is also allowed." I will put up an example of vendor.extensions usage. Cheers, Mikkel
_______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
