Return-Path: 
 <java-dev-return-12420-apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 12842 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2005 02:08:24 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2005 02:08:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 39889 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2005 02:08:21 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 39841 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2005 02:08:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:java-dev@lucene.apache.org>
List-Id: <java-dev.lucene.apache.org>
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 39825 invoked by uid 99); 6 Dec 2005 02:08:21 -0000
Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 18:08:21 -0800
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0
	tests=SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of yseeley@gmail.com designates
 64.233.162.196 as permitted sender)
Received: from [64.233.162.196] (HELO zproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.162.196)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 18:08:20 -0800
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i28so1296760nzi
        for <java-dev@lucene.apache.org>;
 Mon, 05 Dec 2005 18:08:00 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=pT5czAfYCnUYg4z1qen2h+6xolYIhnKtR8L7W44QxvfBVrgJFhIX/Jly/MstdwUUQ3bRJX0lLh4xfHd4fpTr6Kye6/n2s1Xq+pfo620zCzPf7buNJ1y9LiHVQCVuTfLcgGISreRZsApL4QK9DpsQ9wmx3rr3VmZPFNWjwDN3y78=
Received: by 10.65.123.16 with SMTP id a16mr3531098qbn;
        Mon, 05 Dec 2005 18:07:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.64.220.11 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 18:07:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <c68e39170512051807j664fa774p2478bd95c4eceb7f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 21:07:59 -0500
From: Yonik Seeley <yseeley@gmail.com>
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: "Advanced" query language
In-Reply-To: <C582271B-1AFB-4134-A472-ECFB841FB288@ehatchersolutions.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: 
 <B17B1CFF4282214AB8BAADDDC207112205119F00@THHS2EXBE1X.hostedservice2.net>
	 <43947131.2080007@scalix.com>
	 <200512052118.04225.paul.elschot@xs4all.nl>
	 <C582271B-1AFB-4134-A472-ECFB841FB288@ehatchersolutions.com>
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

On 12/5/05, Erik Hatcher <erik@ehatchersolutions.com> wrote:
> Having an XML format representing a Query
> and a mechanism to parse it into an actual Query instance makes a lot
> of sense.

Certainly.  A representation is needed where it is very easy to add
support for new queries, flexible enough to handle *all* query types,
and can easily accomodate change (such as minNrShouldMatch being added
to BooleanQuery).

XML is still far and away the most popular, and hence that makes the most s=
ense.

> The proposed LISP, Python, etc formats don't add anything
> to the equation, and actually complicate it.

Yes, scripting is rather orthogonal to query representation.

There is one little problem with XML though...  It's inability to
directly represent binary data, or even all unicode code points (no,
entities don't fix this).  I use binary data in lucene to represent
some numerics, and that can't be represented in standard XML.  An
application specific escaping mechanism can be used, but then you are
a step away from standard XML.

example:  <tag>&#0;</tag> is not valid XML

If we go with XML, I think this must be solved (or else we are at the
point where we can only represent a subset of queries that lucene can
handle again).

-Yonik

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org