From: Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
To: Austin Clements <amdragon@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Date ranges syntax (was: Xapian locking errors with custom query
	parser)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinzJrdA24V60LBUavUn1arMGQ14CM5ZGwCfGfcV@mail.gmail.com>
References: <87d3nhe3g9.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
	<AANLkTinW_n+zMtLC-fy=naUGsAiFDwdd-mAqSWEDvF=W@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinPph9Lj8h3UztQ74qMaaBVKkXB0rbiLeTX2GmW@mail.gmail.com>
	<87lj0m8ki5.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
	<20110311024730.GA31011@mit.edu>
	<8762rq8byr.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
	<87k4g6vxrw.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
	<AANLkTinzJrdA24V60LBUavUn1arMGQ14CM5ZGwCfGfcV@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-103-g1253785 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 14:50:21 +0100
Message-ID: <87mxkksk4i.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Precedence: list

On Mon, 21 Mar 2011, Austin Clements wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> wrote:
> > Additionally, I'd suggest to support value range queries for dates with
> > ".." syntax. Besides that some users may relay on this syntax, I use
> > date searches a lot and with custom query parser I have to type
> > "after:yesterday", which is unnecessarily long. I wish that
> > "yesterday..", which is much easier to type, would do the same.
> > Similarly, "mon..wed" would be easier to type than "after:mon
> > before:wed". What do you think?
> 
> Personally, I just don't understand the .. range syntax, which is why
> I left it out (also, I was following the example in the TODO file).
> It's completely inconsistent with the rest of the query syntax and
> makes no indication of what it's a range over (what if you had other
> ordinal values to search over?  what if you could search by the
> received date or the sent date?).
> 
> What about something like "date:mon..wed"?  That's consistent with the
> query syntax (the range part becomes part of the date syntax, not part
> of the top-level query syntax), it indicates the domain of the search
> term in a clean and extensible way, and it's succinct.

Yes, the date prefix with ranges in value sounds reasonable and the word
"date" is even shorter than "after" or "before".

-Michal