RE: Proposal to remove facet range feature from SRU 2.0

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

Edo - I suggest the following approach for the server-defined facet range
feature. 

First, assume a model where you for a given range-type facet, like
publication date, you have two indexes: (1) a publicationDate index, where
you index all the publication dates; and (2) a publicationDateRange index
with terms like 'thisWeek', 'lastWeek',
'twoWeeksAgo','lastTwoWeeks','lastMonth', etc.   

And say that the latter index is the facet.  

Of course there needs to be a way to express the relationship of the latter
index to the first.  We can solve that problem in the schema: add an element
with a name like  <associatedIndexIfRangeFacet> under <facet>.  In addition
we could add in the schema, for each facet term, its lowest and highest
value, under <term>.

--Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: Edo Plantinga [mailto:Edo.Plantinga@ictu.nl] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 11:16 AM
To: Denenberg, Ray; search-ws-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: OASIS SWS TC; LeVan,Ralph
Subject: RE: Proposal to remove facet range feature from SRU 2.0

Good to see Ray's proposal, needless to say I agree. 

However, in my opinion the 2.0 specs should mention the alternative
mechanism: the *server-defined* facet ranges (only *client-defined* facet
ranges are dropped according to Ray's proposal). Ideally there would also be
an example of how the server-client interaction messages are handled (such
as in Edward's recent post to this mailing list).
Otherwise people may conclude that facet ranges are not possible in SRU,
which is not the case. 

Regards,

Edo