Re: [search-ws] Scan: another approach

[Farrukh Najmi <farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com>]

If they are two different concepts then they can have two different 
parameter names in two different queries. Thats is not an argument for 
not dealing with the two use cases as one protocol or not IMHO.


LeVan,Ralph wrote:
> Sorry, but startRecord and position are not the same thing.  They look the same when you keep using the value 1, but when do a scan asking for ten terms with my term in the 5th position, it's very different.
>
> The naïve user, when seeing a request with start=5, max=10 will expect something completely different from what I expect when I say position=5, numTerms=10.
>
> Please stop trying to combine the two services.
>
> Ralph
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew J. Dovey [mailto:m.dovey@jisc.ac.uk] 
> Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 12:00 PM
> To: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress; search-ws@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [search-ws] Scan: another approach
>
> Mmmm, interesting - it also got me thinking. Essentially the information
> we send on the request falls into three categories:
>
> The query
> Some positional information (startRecord, MaxRecords)
> Some response formatting instructions (recordFormat, sort)
>
> Can everything we send in a request be categorised as above?
>
> If so, we could simplify our request into three parameters each
> accepting a value which is in someway extensible.
>
> So our requests may look something like:
>
> http://myserver.com/sru?query=sru.CQL:dc.author=smith&positional=[sru.st
> artRecord:1;sru.maximumRecords:10;myextension.stepping:2]&formatting=[sr
> u.recordFormat=MODS;sru.sort=dc.author]
>
> http://myserver.com/sru/query=sru.SCAN:dc.author%20any%20smith&positiona
> l=[sru.startRecord:1;sru.maximumRecords:10]
>
>   


-- 
Regards,
Farrukh Najmi

Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com