This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 3914 - [FT] Section 3.1.2/3.1.3 syntax
Summary: [FT] Section 3.1.2/3.1.3 syntax
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Full Text 1.0 (show other bugs)
Version: Working drafts
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Pat Case
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-10-31 23:15 UTC by Michael Rys
Modified: 2007-04-20 15:41 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Michael Rys 2006-10-31 23:15:05 UTC
We prefer ftor instead of || and ftand for &&. That leaves || open for example to be used to indicate parallelism...
Comment 1 Pat Case 2007-01-31 13:27:19 UTC
The possibility of changing from &&, ||, ! was raised previously in Bug 1630. It's resolution follows:

----
The Full-Text Task Force (FTTF) was advised that it could not 
change "&&", "||", "!" in XQuery and XPath Full-Text to "and", "or", "not" 
without producing conflicts with XQuery. 

At the last Face-to-Face, the FTTF decided not to change from "&&", "||", "!" 
to "ftand", "ftor", "ftnot". The majority of the FTTF prefers the symbolic 
notation. The FTTF realizes that the ampersands will need to be escaped if a 
query is placed in an URL, but considers that manageable.
---

I have a great deal of sympathy with changing to ftand, ftor, ftnot. I think that the words are understandable on their face, where the symbols require explanation. That escaping problem would be an easily available complication.

If || may have a more predictable and expected application, I think we should reconsider the use of &&, ||, ! once more.
Comment 2 Pat Case 2007-02-26 16:15:00 UTC
The FTTF agreed to make this change at the F2F in New Orelans.

Jochen has made these changes in the FT language document. Pat has made them in the FT Use Cases.

Michael, please review the changes and CLOSE this bug if you find the changes  satisfactory.

Pat
Comment 3 Jim Melton 2007-04-20 15:41:38 UTC
Because you participated in the TF when this bug was resolved, we presume that
your concerns are addressed appropriately.  We are therefore marking this bug
as CLOSED.