Could someone provide more context here. I don't understand any of what is being talked about. Is this a proposal for a new feature?
/ Jonas On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Nikunj Mehta <nik...@o-micron.com> wrote: > I would like to confirm the requirements for posting list and inverted index > support in IndexedDB. To that extent, here is a short list ordered by > importance. Please let me know if I have missed anything important. > > 1. Store sorted runs of terms and their occurrences in documents along with a > payload. > a. Each occurrence is identified as some numeric value. > b. The payload is an opaque string value. > 2. Look up a term to obtain its occurrences. > a. Look up produces a cursor, each value of which is the document ID where > the term occurs and the corresponding payload > b. Full power of cursors as available in IndexedDB is present, i.e., > KeyRange and direction. > 3. An inverted index could be linked to an object store, in which case, it is > possible to look up objects using the inverted index. > 4. When an object is removed from the object store linked to an inverted > index, no automatic change management applies to inverted index. In other > words, the inverted index is application managed. > 5. Find co-occurrence of terms. > a. This would bring back the join feature that was present in earlier > versions of the spec [1], although in a different API form than earlier. > 6. Store lexicon for IDF-type statistics > a. term-level statistics > > I am not sure if there is any point in specifying performance and efficiency > goals in the spec. > > Nikunj > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-WebSimpleDB-20090929/#entity-join >
