[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: Proposal to remove facet range feature from SRU 2.0
Edo - I suggest the following approach for the server-defined facet range feature. First, assume a model where you for a given range-type facet, like publication date, you have two indexes: (1) a publicationDate index, where you index all the publication dates; and (2) a publicationDateRange index with terms like 'thisWeek', 'lastWeek', 'twoWeeksAgo','lastTwoWeeks','lastMonth', etc. And say that the latter index is the facet. Of course there needs to be a way to express the relationship of the latter index to the first. We can solve that problem in the schema: add an element with a name like <associatedIndexIfRangeFacet> under <facet>. In addition we could add in the schema, for each facet term, its lowest and highest value, under <term>. --Ray -----Original Message----- From: Edo Plantinga [mailto:Edo.Plantinga@ictu.nl] Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 11:16 AM To: Denenberg, Ray; search-ws-comment@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: OASIS SWS TC; LeVan,Ralph Subject: RE: Proposal to remove facet range feature from SRU 2.0 Good to see Ray's proposal, needless to say I agree. However, in my opinion the 2.0 specs should mention the alternative mechanism: the *server-defined* facet ranges (only *client-defined* facet ranges are dropped according to Ray's proposal). Ideally there would also be an example of how the server-client interaction messages are handled (such as in Edward's recent post to this mailing list). Otherwise people may conclude that facet ranges are not possible in SRU, which is not the case. Regards, Edo
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]