Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Termselection arguments that support non-matching #15

Open
RieksJ opened this issue Dec 7, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Termselection arguments that support non-matching #15

RieksJ opened this issue Dec 7, 2023 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@RieksJ
Copy link
Member

RieksJ commented Dec 7, 2023

Currently, termselection can add or remove MRG entries based on the (existing) values of fields.

For example, status[draft] selects entries that have a field status: draft.

However, it would be nice to have a syntax that would be capable of selecting all entries that have a status field defined, whose value is NOT draft.

This issue calls for proposals for such a syntax (e.g. using the ! character, as in status[!draft]), deciding on it, and then modify the TEv2 specifications and implement it.

@RieksJ RieksJ added enhancement New feature or request impact: MRGT labels Dec 7, 2023
@Ca5e
Copy link
Member

Ca5e commented Dec 10, 2023

The proposed syntax using the ! character should work fine, as an alternative I'd say using the keyword not may work well.
status[!draft]
status[not draft]

@RieksJ
Copy link
Member Author

RieksJ commented Dec 10, 2023

This raises other ponderings: what would be the meaning of

  • status[not draft, envisaged, reviewable]?
  • termType[not concept, not pattern, relation]?

Would logical expressions make sense (i.e.: can we think of realistic use-cases for that)?

@RieksJ RieksJ added the defer resolution of this issue is deferred to an unspecified later time label Dec 11, 2023
@RieksJ RieksJ removed the defer resolution of this issue is deferred to an unspecified later time label Jan 24, 2024
@RieksJ
Copy link
Member Author

RieksJ commented Jan 24, 2024

I would like to do this, because there is a need for it (in the digital passports projects).

However, I want to start small, implementing the following features:

  • Let the ! (and/or) not operator in front of a text mean that every MRG entry that does NOT have the text in the designated field, is selected;
  • Let the * operator mean that EVERY MRG entry that has a text defined for the field (not being the empty string) is selected. This means, e.g., that status[*] selects all entries for which a status field is defined, not being the empty string.

@Ca5e: can you comment on this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants