OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

search-ws message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [search-ws] 2.0 features (draft message to SRU implementors)


That's a good point for discussion.   I thought that in the final analysis
we decided that the response format was a property of a binding.   We had a
heated discussion over this on the SRU list, which seemed to be the major
catalyst for  us (the TC) to come up with the whole Abstract Protocol
Defintion approach.

However, to have an alternative response format parameter within SRU 2.0 is
certainly something that a number of people seemed very enthusiastic about
(though several other seemed violently opposed).   I see no reason not to
add it to the list, and then it could at least get discussed again.

Thanks Ralph.

--Ray


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "LeVan,Ralph" <levan@oclc.org>
To: "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>;
<search-ws@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 1:46 PM
Subject: RE: [search-ws] 2.0 features (draft message to SRU implementors)


What happened to non-SRU responses? i.e., Atom Feed

Ralph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress [mailto:rden@loc.gov]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 11:47 AM
> To: search-ws@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [search-ws] 2.0 features (draft message to SRU implementors)
>
> Following is a draft message that I propose to post to the SRU list.
> This
> is for discussion at tomorrow's call. We should discuss what else to
> include
> in the message and/or other messages (should there be multiple
messages
> -
> to avoid overload of a given message).
>
>
> ******* DRAFT MESSAGE ***************
>
> SRU Implementors:
>
> The OASIS Search Web Services Technical Committee invites your
> participation
> in the development of SRU/CQL 2.0.
>
> We have begun accumulating suggestions for 2.0 features. Additional
> suggestions are welcome.  We are also currently gathering requirements
> for
> geospatial  and LOM applications.
>
>  Among the suggestions are:
>
> 1. Allow Non-XML Record Representations
> Many formats do not map easily into XML, for example multimedia,
> images, and
> even complex text formats. Allow non-xml serialized data in the
> response, or
> value by reference. These would be signaled by additional values for
> the
> recordPacking parameter. For example   recordPacking="base64" or
> recordPacking="uri"
>
> 2. Proximity
> deprecate the PROX BOOLEAN operator and instead represent proximity by
> adding a relation, 'window'.  examples:
> * dc.title window/distance<5/unit=word "fries salt vinegar"
>  (fries, salt, and vinegar all within a span of 5 words)
> *dc.title window/distance<5/unit=word ((fish and fries) and (salt or
> vinegar))
> (fish and chips and one of salt or vinegar, in a 5 word window)
> * dc.title window/distance=2/unit=word/ordered "fries salt "
> (fries followed by salt with 2 words between)
>
> 3. Faceted Searching ("scan" a result set)
> One might search a library database for books about a particular
topic,
> and
> then see how many records there are in different time period
>
> 4. Result Set Size
> Allow the client to indicate how much effort the server should take to
> determine or estimate the number of records in the result set.
> Similarly,
> allow the response to estimate accuracy of  the result-set-size
> reported.
> The server may be able to determine the exact number of records, or
> provide
> a realistic estimate, but it may be an expensive process. The server
> might
> prefer not go through that process unless the client requests that it
> do so.
> Or the client might want to explicitly request that the server go
> through,
> or not go through, that process. (The client might want the first 10
> records, or any 10 records, regardless of how many records there are.
> In
> that case if the server goes through the process of determining how
> many
> records there are, it may go through an expensive process for nothing.
> There
> is also the special case where the server cannot determine or estimate
> the
> number of records in the result set. In that case it might be useful
to
> have
> a special value or some way to indicate this condition.)
>
> 5. Multiple Query Types
> CQL is currently the only query type used by SRU but there could be
> other
> query types as well, for example, Parameterized Query and XQuery.
>
> 6.  Eliminate the Version and Operation Parameters
> These two parameters  are based on the assumption that the same base
> URL
> might be used for different operations and versions. Instead,
different
> base
> URLs should be used.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>




[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]