hello dominik. thanks for the feedback! ... adding regex support could be regarded as a logical step up in functionality from the current slices which use
Message 1 of 1
, Jan 6
thanks for the feedback!
On 2012-12-30 13:59 , Dominik Tomaszuk wrote:
> I propose to add "regexp" scheme. For example:
> Following the listing in § 2, the above CSV fragment selects a slice,
> yielding another CSV table as follows:
adding regex support could be regarded as a logical step up in
functionality from the current slices which use strict matches only.
however, the general design question is whether sophisticated
content-based identification is worth the effort, and what the use cases
are. generally speaking, fragids shouldn't be seen as some form of
"search mechanism", this can be left to clients by themselves. they
should mainly focus on identification, and there identifying by location
usually works fine. we are considering dropping splices all together,
because they already cross the line into "search land".
interestingly, we had the same discussions when we designed fragids for
plain text files (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5147). we had the same
proposals to add regexes and maybe even more sophisticated mechanisms
(string distance measures, for example) for identifiers that are robust
against some changes. however, in the end these mechanisms did not make
the 80/20 cut, and instead an integrity check mechanism was added
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5147#section-3.1), so that it's at least
possible to detect changes in the resource representation.
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer.
We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.