Re: result size precision

["Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Edward C. Zimmermann" <edz@BSN.COM>
> But we're still missing some important states.. like "volatile"..
> Or "minimum" (at least this many) or maximum (probably no more than..)...

Good point.  I agree these are important states to incorporate somehow.

> We've been doing some work in distributed p2p search networks.. and here
> the longer a search runs the larger the set can perhaps be but it can also
> shrink as we dynamically adjust the granularity of information..
converging
> upon some size in unknown time--- the search is given fuel and like a
motorcar
> can be re-fueled..

Could you elaborate or give a concrete example?  The set shrinking as you
dynamically adjust the granularity of information; the search given fuel:
fascinating ideas, but what do they mean?


> What I'm suggesting is instead of this pseudo analytical 0-100 stuff we
> have nice qualitative words as a minimum public vocabulary such as as
> "exact", "unknown", "minimum" (its at least this many), "maximum" (its no
> more than this) etc. and allow for "personal extensions" as any term other
> than these (or whatever magic words we define).. together with a
> controlled core list of modalities.. (such as shall be, is, was etc.)
>
> Clients would only "need to" understand the 0 (don't know) and 1 (exact)..
> but could grasp more..

In my opinion this is a good suggestion well-worth consideration. It is
important to note, you should post this suggestion to the OASIS public
comment list for this activity.

See
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/comments/index.php?wg_abbrev=search-ws

(To subscribe, send a blank email message to
search-ws-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org.  Once subscribed, email to
search-ws-comment@lists.oasis-open.org.)

Please note, I'm not saying that discussion is to be carried out on that
list, however that list needs to officially record any comments.

Thanks.

--Ray