I have two areas to comment on: (1) queryn and the "operation" concept, and (2) parameter order.
(1) queryn and the "operation" concept
If we are going to incorporate this new feature into SRU, I would like to do it without serious disruption to our operations model. Introcuding a new operation would be a serious disruption. And I don't see that it is necessary to introduce a new operation anyway.
Questions like (from Tony)
"And then what happens if one has queryType=cql and no query parameter?" ….
…. are very easily answered: 'it is an invalid request, the request fails with a diagnostic (something like) "incompatible combination of parameters" '
In fact I would go so far as to suggest that 'cql-form' could be added to the list of well-known query types. When queryType=cql-form: the query parameter MUST be omitted, and <these other> parameters included.
So therefore I do not want to see the queryn parameter justified on the basis of the operation concept, and since the other reasons offerend for it are considered minor, I think I do not want it included at all.
(2) parameter order.
Isn't it necessary and sufficient to say that the parameter names must be strictly ascending?
There has been suggestion that they should be (a) unique, or (b) consecutive.
But I don't see that "unique" is sufficient, or that "consecutive" is necessary (nor that it is well-defined). But it seems to me that "strictly ascending" is necessary and sufficient.
--Ray
From: LeVan,Ralph [mailto:levan@oclc.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 2:42 PM
To: Hammond, Tony; Denenberg, Ray; Matthew Dovey; OASIS SWS TC
Subject: RE: [search-ws] queryn: Some further comments
The parameters will not be numbered consecutively if they come from a form. Forms do not transmit all their fields.
Ralph
From: Hammond, Tony [mailto:t.hammond@nature.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 12:09 PM
To: LeVan,Ralph; Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress; Matthew Dovey; OASIS SWS TC
Subject: RE: [search-ws] queryn: Some further comments
No. All the fields are present numbered consecutively in CQL order - not necessarily form order. The query builder will merely drop clauses (and fields thereof) with empty terms. It is the field contents that contribute to the query. The fact that one field was passed over, another included, is not recorded in the final string which is just a complete CQL query string.
So, if the fields are iterated over in clause order it does not matter. They are evaluated in proper sequence. There are no gaps in numbering.
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: LeVan,Ralph [mailto:levan@oclc.org]
Sent: Thu 12/16/2010 3:23 PM
To: Hammond, Tony; Hammond, Tony; Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress; Matthew Dovey; OASIS SWS TC
Subject: RE: [search-ws] queryn: Some further comments
There can be gaps in the numbering. Not all fields present in a form
get submitted.
Ralph
From: Hammond, Tony [mailto:t.hammond@nature.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 6:08 AM
To: Hammond,Tony; Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress; Matthew Dovey;
LeVan,Ralph; OASIS SWS TC
Subject: RE: [search-ws] queryn: Some further comments
Hi:
Some further comments.
1. On reflection I guess that "queryn" could be dispensed with as long
as an empty "query" parameter were present in the query to a) signal the
searchRetrieve operation, and b) to receive the assembled query.
2. I had earlier proposed briefer forms of the parameters which would
make the querystring more manageable.
Instead of
"q1.idx", "q1.rel", "q1.trm", "q1.bln"
I proposed
"qi1", "qr1", "qt1", "qb1"
which are cleaner (half the length) and slighly easier to manipulate
(only prefix and index to manage instead of prefix, index, and suffix).
3. Since the query parameters are built with integers they are
arbitrarily extensible (do not require a fixed length form) and sort
order is completely in hands of the form generator. Doesn't matter where
the parameters appear on the form - just their call order. And then they
can be simply iterated over.
4. My preference is still for an explicit count (queryn) as I think this
is easier than trying to compute the number of clauses. And the count is
already known to the form generator since it is adding an index to the
clause parameters. Would almost seem to be a no-brainer.
5. Because of the boolean coupling of search clauses we require a
boolean associated with the search clause which for convenience we take
to be trailing - i.e. operates between this clause and any subsequent
clause. The final boolean in the series will always be omitted.
Tony
************************************************************************
********
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone
who is
not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in
error
please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other
storage
mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents
accept
liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and
not
expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its
agents.
Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its
agents
accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this
e-mail or
its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and
attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of
Macmillan
Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication.
Macmillan
Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered
number 785998
Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS
************************************************************************
********
********************************************************************************
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is
not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error
please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage
mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept
liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not
expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents.
Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents
accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or
its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and
attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan
Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan
Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998
Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS
********************************************************************************