Re: Initial description of Pluggable Content Indexing Serviceproposalsub-proprosal

[Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@sun.com>]

Matt,

I would like to see a classifivcationType attribute on Classification class for
another reason,
which may address the need you bring up (identify content based Classification
from normal
Classification).

The other reason I had is to distinguis when a Classification is used for
classification Vs. when
a Classification is used for external identification. This is related to a
proposal I made at:

 http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/regrep-ex-scheme/200109/msg00001.html

As an off-topic aside, I would be curious of your thoughts on replacing
ExternalIdentifier
with Classification instance where the classificationType is ExternalIdentifier
instead of Classification.

Matthew MacKenzie wrote:

> After re-reading appendix D and selected parts of the RS and RIM specs, I've
> come to apreciate the content index as classification concept more.  The
> automatic classification of XML content based on the inherent context of XML
> is something I have done extensive research work on, I just failed to
> identify appendix D as being just that.
>
> With that said, what do you guys think about having an extra attribute on
> classifications that can identify the scheme as being content based (or
> externally applied)?  I think that being able to distinguish a scheme as
> being content would be useful.  The way this could be done now would be by
> having some text in the root classification for the scheme which suggests it
> is content based, which is not optimal given that there could be multiple
> schemes updated from one piece of content.  For example, let's say that a
> content indexer for mydoctype extracts fine grained geographical information,
> such as Street and Building and adds classification nodes in a classification
> scheme that is not content based.  In a UI, it would be nice to be able to
> format content-based entries differently so that the user knows that she is
> seeing an extension of a fixed classification.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matt
>
> On Sunday 16 September 2001 07:54, Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> > Matt,
> >
> > Thanks for your encouraging words and comments on the brief writeup.
> >
> > Please find my comments inline. The summary of my thoughts is that we
> > should articulate the use cases (with priority 1-3) that CBQ is expected to
> > support and then stick with proposals that address those use cases.
>
> --
> Matthew MacKenzie
> XML Global
>
> <quote>
> There *__is* intelligent life on Earth, but I leave for Texas on Monday.
> </quote>

--
Regards,
Farrukh

begin:vcard 
n:Najmi;Farrukh
tel;work:781-442-0703
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.sun.com
org:Sun Microsystems;Java Software
adr:;;1 Network Dr. MS BUR02-302;Burlington;MA;01803-0902;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:najmi@east.sun.com
fn:Farrukh Najmi
end:vcard