ETCBC Search Issue

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Hi ya,

 

  Acc 12.0.1

  Mac 10.11.6

 

  I have this search :

 

 

  And this result, which I've annotated.

  I would expect that Gen 22:14 should not be returned by this search.

 

 

  I've marked up how the elements of the search map to the hit in Gen 22:14. The blue ones I think are fine. The green one is the match of the predicate as you can see by the result highlighting. But given all elements are depth=0 how is it that the intervening L_A clause (circled in red) does not disqualify this verse ? Is this a bug or is there some optimization of the search going on where clauses are nested or ?

 

Thx

D

Edited December 13, 2016 by דָנִיאֶל

[Joel Brown]

I believe this is a bug - sorry about the delayed response, but we'll look into it!

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Thanx Joel. BTW, I've noticed one or two things about depth in searches which I want to mention but I have not crystalised my thoughts yet. Briefly, I am concerned about whether depth settings greater than 0 can cause clause/phrase boundaries to be violated with respect to what the search specifies. It's not just in ETCBC syntax. I'll try to write up something in more detail when I'm back in town next week, but in case you see something odd while poking around.

 

thx

D

[Joel Brown]

If all is working, the depth shouldn't violate horizontal boundaries (i.e. before or after the edges of the phrase or clause), but it by definition allows for searching deeper, in subphrases or subclauses.

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Understood - I will go over my examples and convince myself whether it is or is not happening and let you know.

 

thx

D