Open RieksJ opened 11 months ago
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]
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)?
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:
!
(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;*
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?
Currently, termselection can add or remove MRG entries based on the (existing) values of fields.
For example,
status[draft]
selects entries that have a fieldstatus: 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 instatus[!draft]
), deciding on it, and then modify the TEv2 specifications and implement it.