Subject: Re: [search-ws] RE: APP?
Yes Farrukh I think you misunderstood. His suggestion is to scrap SRU, start over and build a protocol based on the Atom Publishing Protocol. I think that this notion about starting from scratch needs some strong clarification. We now have 20-25 years of intellectual capital accrued in Z39.50 including the past seven years with sru/srw. We are not starting from scratch. (The issue of response format is relatively minor in comparison, and one that we will resolve without too much trouble I think. I'm going to post a proposal on that soon, I hope.) --Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Farrukh Najmi" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: "LeVan,Ralph" <email@example.com> Cc: "identifiers-l" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 11:30 AM Subject: Re: [search-ws] RE: APP? > > I assume by APP you mean Atom Publishing Protocol > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom_Publishing_Protocol>? > > If so, the suggestion is probably to use the ATOM feed format for search > results instead of inventing our own. > I strongly support this suggestion and have logged it under as P1 issue > farrukh-6 at: > > <http://wiki.oasis-open.org/search-ws/issues> > > The discussion thread on that proposal is at: > > <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/search-ws/email/archives/20071 0/msg00068.html> > > Forgive me if I misunderstood the issue. Thanks. > > LeVan,Ralph wrote: > >> From: Identifiers Working Group List > >> [mailto:IDENTIFIERS-L@OCLC.ORG] > >> On Behalf Of Houghton,Andrew > >> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 10:50 AM > >> To: identifiers-l > >> Subject: RE: APP? > >> > >> Since the OASIS committee is already redefining SRU and is > >> not tied down to maintain backward compatibility, then > >> using an APP response would be worth while. However, > >> not being on the committee, its not clear why they > >> would start with SRU as a basis and not APP. > >> > > > > Because there are no signs of any searching capability in APP? > > > > > >> One of the downsides to SRU is there is no equivalent APP > >> service document. So I just cannot query a URL and find > >> out about all the collections that an SRU server supports. > >> > > > > True. That was in intentional decision when we created SRU. We were > > reacting to the overly complex Explain mechanism of Z39.50 that needed > > to support the ability to describe how a client might search across > > multiple databases. That turned into a nightmare. > > > > In SRU we decided to just describe the collections themselves. I agree > > that a simple list of the collections would be useful. In fact, my SRU > > server provides just such a list because I found it useful. You can be > > sure that it is being discussed in the OASIS group. > > > > > >> The Explain request is for a specific collection and its, > >> IMHO, worthless since while it tells you the names of the > >> indexes, it doesn't tell you whether the index is a phrase > >> or word index and which operators are supported on that > >> index. So if you are trying to write a generic SRU client > >> to talk to unknown SRU servers in an SOA context, it > >> just doesn't work. > >> > > > > I suspect you are reacting to my own implementation of SRU. I'm sure > > the Explain experts on the SRU list could tell us how to specify what > > operations are supported on a particular index. > > > > > -- > Regards, > Farrukh Najmi > > Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS > at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >