Re: [search-ws] Fw: CQL 2.0?

["Hammond, Tony" <t.hammond@nature.com>]

Hi Ray:

I've posted the mail cc'ed below to Adam and the SRU list:

    http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1006&L=zng&T=0&P=4788

If anybody here has any opinions would be glad to hear.

Cheers,

Tony


ps/
Btw, do we really need to capitalize 'Boolean' in the BNF productions. I
wouldn't. Looks so ugly. Also, I wouldn't even in the text either. Highest
compliment to a mathematician is to lowercase their name, e.g. 'abelian'.


==

------ Forwarded Message
> From: <Hammond>, Tony <t.hammond@nature.com>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:58:36 +0100
> To: Adam Dickmeiss <adam@indexdata.dk>
> Cc: <ZNG@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
> Conversation: CQL 2.0?
> Subject: Re: CQL 2.0?
> 
> Hi Adam:
> 
> Responding to your points from last week:
> 
> ######################
> #2 - quoted-uri-string
> ######################
> Does it work if we change the rule to this:
> 
> ==
> quoted-uri-string   =   quoted-string
> 
>  ; Double quotes enclosing a URI string.
>  ;
>  ; RFC 3986 (STD 66) specifies the allowed characters
>  ; for a URI which all fall within the printable subset of
>  ; US-ASCII.     
> ==
> 
> That is, we make 'quoted-uri-string' a non-terminal which expands to the more
> general rule 'quoted-string' with comments included for info purposes only.
> 
> (Alternately one could just add 'quoted-uri-string' to the 'search-term' RHS,
> but the above I guess is prefereable.)
> 
> 
> ######################
> #3 - prefix-name
> ######################
> Likewise could we not change the prefix-name rule to this pair
> 
> ==
> prefix-name  =  prefix-string
> 
> prefix-string  = prefix "." simple-name
> ==
> 
> and then add prefix-string to the search-term RHS so?
> 
> ==
> search-term = simple-string / prefix-string / quoted-string
> ==
> 
> 
> Would either of those reformulations work for you?
> 
> 
> ######################
> #1 - booleans, sort-by
> ######################
> I understand also that you are fine with dispensing with the ability to allow
> bareword booleans as search terms but (if needed) to require something like
> 
> query = "and" 
> 
> Otherwise should we explicitly add back in to the search-term rule as
>  
> ==
> search-term = simple-string / prefix-string / quoted-string / bolean / sort-by
> ==
> 
> What would be your preference?
> 
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to look at the BNF and finding these loopholes.
> 
> Tony
> 
==




On 10/6/10 23:25, "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov> wrote:

> From all of the discussion of CQL last week I think there's only one point
> remaining that we need to concern ourselves with (let me know if you concur)
> and that would be the points that Tony addresses in response to the Adam's
> points.
> 
> Tony again since you won't be joining us Monday if you have a chance could
> you post a note recommending what we should do about this?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --Ray
> 
> 


********************************************************************************   
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is
not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error
please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage
mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept
liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not
expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents.
Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents
accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or
its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and 
attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan 
Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan 
Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 
Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS   
********************************************************************************