https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64177
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)gmx.de> ---
[Please ignore the previous comment.]
(In reply to comment #2)
This new extended searching criteria are ok.
Just one note regarded:
- "is not possible to define searches where
the *same* value must meet different criteria"
This meas that a query like this is not allowed?
[ 'or',
[ 'and',
[ 'begins_with', 'structured-name/given' , 'a' ],
[ 'begins_with', 'structured-name/family', 'b' ]
],
[ 'and',
[ 'begins_with', 'structured-name/given' , 'b' ],
[ 'begins_with', 'structured-name/family', 'a' ]
]
]
That query itself is fine and will be supported. It works as intended because
there is only one structured-name.
The comment was about value lists, like telephone numbers. For example, suppose
you have two telephone numbers in the same contact:
TEL:1234
TEL:5678
Now you search
['and',
['contains', 'phones/value', '1'],
['contains', 'phones/value', '5']
]
This will match the contact, because each of the terms combined with 'and' has
a match in the contact: the first term will match '1234' and the second
'5678'.
This follows from the strict mathematic definition of the operations, but is
admittedly not immediately obvious.
I think it is a corner case. It occurred to me when documenting the semantic
and I wanted to write it down. Obviously, better documentation would not have
triggered a question ;-} Please suggest a better wording.
Sort status update - recursive queries and "or"/"and" are working.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.